• 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.

Stability - KT400 or nForce 2? Which board?

C

Carl Uman

Diamond Member
I need stability, raid, USB2.0
Was going to go with Intel but I think the AMD boards offer more of what I'm looking for at this time.

Which chipset should I go with? Also which board? Not to wild on Asus as their support sucks. I don't want to mess with SATA adapters to get my raid either. I also don't want to jump through hoops to get my raid working and XP installed. Driver issues suck!

Thanks for the help,
Carl
 
hi bud,

the nf2 have me baffled, theres so many do likes and dont likes

so far i like the soltek frn2, its a long read but best bang for the buck board out there,

i heard and am probably wrong that kt400 boards might be a lil slower but more up your alley

hope it helps


KILLLLLLAAAAAAAA
 
The nForce2 chipsets are much better than the KT400(a). The KT400's have more flaws and offer less support for future upgrades. Most problems people are having with the nForce boards is not so much related to the chipset as it is implementaion. I would highly suggest the nF2 over KT400. If you want to wait, you can see what KT600 does when it comes out, but for now... go nF2.
 
Originally posted by: floccus
The nForce2 chipsets are much better than the KT400(a). The KT400's have more flaws and offer less support for future upgrades. Most problems people are having with the nForce boards is not so much related to the chipset as it is implementaion. I would highly suggest the nF2 over KT400. If you want to wait, you can see what KT600 does when it comes out, but for now... go nF2.
Click to expand...

i agree. most of the SATA RAID problems are caused by the SATA controller
but ther is still one problem and that is Nvidia's SW IDE drivers
if you don't install that, then you'll be fine
 
What kind of RAID array are you setting up? There's usually very little point to setting up a RAID array with an onboard RAID controller. Buy a separate add-in PCI RAID controller if you are serious about RAID. Any nForce2 board will do fine, be it ASUS, Epox, ABIT, etc. etc.
 
Originally posted by: Evan Lieb
What kind of RAID array are you setting up? There's usually very little point to setting up a RAID array with an onboard RAID controller. Buy a separate add-in PCI RAID controller if you are serious about RAID. Any nForce2 board will do fine, be it ASUS, Epox, ABIT, etc. etc.
Click to expand...
Really... onboard RAID is pointless? I have two WD 8MB cache drives that I'm going to stripe on two seperate cables. I'd really like to know your view on this.

BTW I ended getting an intel board w/o SATA as I don't want to deal with the headaches.

Thanks much,
Carl
 
Ok, you are right to go with drives on separate cables here. The reason for this is that deviced on the same cable cannot be accessed at the same time. This would defeat the purpose of a RAID in this case. By putting the drive on their own channels, each drive is able to be accessed simultaneously. Also, you should definitely get a PCI controller. Most onboard solutions are on passing in quality. A PCI based solution would be much better and also allows you to use more drives in a non-array if need be.
 
Everyone says that nforce2 is better, but I have had both and have had no problems on either, although the nforce is a bit fasster in the benchmarks.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top