<Bob> wrote in message news:cjvjs0pav2mkikk8u74hhk4eb5dt0vnve3@4ax.com...
> On Wed, 22 Dec 2004 17:57:16 -0500, "Dave C." <mdupre RemoveThis @sff.net> wrote:
>
> Do you see an advantage in the Gigabyte boards over the cheaper intel
> board? The Gigabyte boards cost more and look more complicated?? I
> thought about the Northwood because I read that while older and more
> espensive--it runs cooler, and actually works better than the newer
> Prescott. Do you agree?
>
> Bob
I see no advantage at all in the Gigabyte boards over the cheaper intel
board. The only thing I don't like about the intel board is that it has no
built-in LAN, that I could find. But that's not a biggie, with ethernet
cards being so cheap. Otherwise, any other board by Gigabyte or anybody
else, if more expensive, would just cost more. Also, that specific intel
board doesn't state that it is prescott ready. But you can always put a
northwood in it.
As for prescott versus northwood . . . I strongly disagree with most of the
so-called experts. The prescotts do run a little warmer, but this is NOT a
problem. All processors (including northwoods) generate heat, and must be
cooled. There are CHEAP coolers for the prescott processors that keep that
processor nice and cool . . .
The experts trashing the prescott for running warm are like automobile
experts trashing a car because it comes with crappy tires. WHO CARES?!?
Tires are cheap (relatively speaking). If your prescott is too "warm",
spend ten bucks on a better cooler that will probably be quieter, also.
But then, there is NO difference in performance between the northwood and
prescott, so if you'd prefer to use an intel boxed processor with standard
HSF, then Northwood would be a better choice. -Dave (typing this on a
prescott processor that has never exceeded 120F, even under load for hours)<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
>> Stay informed about: Which motherboard?--or suggestion 
FAQ
Profile
Private Messages
Log in
