• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Desktop socket 479 boards

L

Liver

Senior member
With Yonah out do you know / think there will be any more choices for desktop socket 479 motherboards?

Or do you think using a socket 479 chip would now almost require using the CT-479 adapter?

Also, do you know of the source on how to mod the adapter? Apparently there is a modification out there, but I am unable to find it. A modded one was posted in the for sale / trade forum, but the seller did not / would not give me any information to mod my own.

Thanks
 
Well, AOpen already sells one... So maybe there are more to come... After all, these chips perform very good... Imagine DFI or EPoX making such a board... :Q

There are some restrictions about using the adapter, but all in all, it's actually a pretty good way to make a Pentium M fit into your Asus mobo...

BTW, I only know of ASRock having S478 mobo's with PCIe, so that could be a disadvantage...

What modding are you talking about?
 
Yea, the chips are awesome. Low heat and high performance, great starting specs. The mod I am talking about is done to the adapter to help in overclocking. Other than that I do not know. I have searched for CT-479 mods, but no luck. Found good stuff on an "extreme - something" website.
 
The mods you are talking about are the "Hipro" mods. You can find them on XtremeSystems.org forums in the modding section.
 
Originally posted by: boshuter
The mods you are talking about are the "Hipro" mods. You can find them on XtremeSystems.org forums in the modding section.
Click to expand...

you the man, exactly what I wanted to research.:thumbsup:
 
Thing is, spending this much money for the expensive Pentium-M platform is highly pointless - if you look at the real power numbers.

Dothan CPU: 27W, i915 northbridge 15W - both "max" figures.

Half as much money buys you a system with a plain normal Athlon-64 "Venice" core (real world maximum power consumption 30W for a 3500+), with those 30W already including the RAM controller, and unlike Intel's desktop offerings, actual power-saving technology Cool&Quiet. You also have an actual choice on mainboards and other components, totally unlike on socket-479
 
Originally posted by: Peter
Thing is, spending this much money for the expensive Pentium-M platform is highly pointless - if you look at the real power numbers.

Dothan CPU: 27W, i915 northbridge 15W - both "max" figures.

Half as much money buys you a system with a plain normal Athlon-64 "Venice" core (real world maximum power consumption 30W for a 3500+), with those 30W already including the RAM controller, and unlike Intel's desktop offerings, actual power-saving technology Cool&Quiet. You also have an actual choice on mainboards and other components, totally unlike on socket-479
Click to expand...

Wow. I need to look into this more. Recommendations on good place to get the real power consumptions for a variety of processors?

 
Wow. I need to look into this more. Recommendations on good place to get the real power consumptions for a variety of processors?
Click to expand...
AMD and Intel both publicly release datasheets for their processors which include all the electrical and thermal data you could ever want.

AMD > Support > Tech Docs > Processor Datasheets

Intel > Support > Tech Docs > Processor Datasheets
 
Wherein AMD's power figures are thermal design ceilings for an entire series of processors. This number is what AMD want you to consider when you design a cooling concept that is to cover _any_ CPU that might ever appear for this platform. When you limit yourself to a certain processor, you can aim much lower.

Pay e.g. Lost Circuits a visit to see their _measured_ results of how little power the AMD processors _actually_ draw, and what a huge headroom there is to said thermal design values.

http://www.lostcircuits.com/cpu/amd_venice/

Even the worst case in single cores, 2.4 GHz Clawhammer 4000+, couldn't be made to draw more than 72 watts, where a Venice of the same clock speed (3800+) hardly ever hits 30W.
The thermal design power you'll find in the datasheets is 89W for both.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top