AMD 761 vs. VIA KT266A vs. SIS 735

[Stephen Soulsby]

I am thinking about going to an Athlon 1700+ or 1800+ here in a couple of months or so. I almost exclusively use EPoX boards, but I may try something different this time just for variety. I am wondering how these three chipsets compare? I have my eye on the EPoX EP-8K7A+ with the AMD 761.

[Jimstep]

Go for it...:D

[missiveusa]

From all reviews and info I've read, VIA's KT-266A is king of the Socket A chipsets. Check out Tom's Hardware for a roundup review of KT-266A based mainboards.

[wallie_x]

I own a board with the Sis 735 chipset. Its one of the most stable systems I've built, but I am also running Windows XP which is perhaps M$ most stable OS. MSI, and I heard Abit, are coming out with boards based on the Sis 745. Do your home work and read up at the tech web sites. But remember, we are currently near a major transition in CPU and FSB speed. It may pay to wait things out a bit

[missiveusa]

But remember, we are currently near a major transition in CPU and FSB speed. It may pay to wait things out a bit

What transition would that be? As I see it, the only real leap in CPU performance on the horizion is AMD's 64 bit architechture code named Hammer. According to AMD"s roadmap, we can expect to see the retail version of Hammer in desktop performance PC's in the 2nd half of 2003. Let's hope so.

[wallie_x]

My supposition is more based on the current state of CPU affairs than on hard fact. DDR is increasing speed. If you've seen the benchmarks then you know that running in an asychronous mode DDR 333 with the current Athlon FSB at 133 times two, fairs somewhat badly when compared to the synchronous 133/133 mode. If AMD wants to keep pace, especially with the P4 soon increasing in FSB speed to accomodate faster RDRAM, AMD has no choice but to modify its plan and adapt the thoroughbred to the increase in memory speed. If they do, they can then rest on there laurels for a while instead of being ostrisized for poor performance ratings and not keeping pace. Maybe I'm full of it. Maybe they will solve the asynchronous FSB problem, but the smell of a necessary increase in FSB speed is in the wind.

[missiveusa]

Oh definitely, FSB speeds will increase. The 333MHz DDR boards are already available. I think I read a review @ Anantech comparing the 333 MHz boards to the KT-266A. Performance gains were minimal. I guess my point is that the next genuine advance in chipset/cpu design is Hammer (or Itanium on the Intel side). Until then, whatever the mfg's trot out for our consumption will be faster versions of what we have now. No great leaps in performance.
I'll probably stay with my KT-133A system until Hammer's release in 2003. Nothing against DDR: If I had a KT-266A system, I'd stick with that.

[wallie_x]

I some times get the feeling that we've been played for chumps, I mean by Intel. A certain person has made me frightfully aware that the P4 is leaps ahead of its time. Consider this: you design a CPU that is a quantum leap in architechture. The unfortunate reality is that none of the rest of the supporting cast even now exists. What I mean is that you are anchored down with a PCI bus that is stuck in 33mhz mode. All the people who make the peripherals to support your new CPU are in that mode, years behind your design parameters. What would you do? What Intel did? Cripple the CPU's capabilities so that it fit the current time zone. Think about it. Why would Intel make such a inferior instruction per clock cycle CPU as compared to the Athlon XP unless there were some ulterior motive? Haven't they played that game before? Isn't the Celeron a crippled P3? Especially when the design of the P4 was capable of so much more. It was designed for future machines. I think it will come into its own in a couple of years. To bad they got AMD on their heels. Never has a company underestimated its opponents as Intel has AMD. I just get the feeling that I have underestimated Intel. But if I look through it all capitalism seems to be Intel's motive: extract as much money as possible from the market in the mean time even if it means selling an inferior product.