AMR Modems - Any Good?

[Bellbus]

Are AMR Modem that plug into the slot on your motherboard any good, or are they like onboard Sound and Video in that they suck!

The reason I ask is the onboard modems on PC Chips boards were quite simply rubbish.

Am I better just getting a PCI modem (hardware, I don't touch software modems)?

I have absolutely no interest in using the 'modem Ring On' option to wake the machine up using the modem.

[SnomanJack]

I have an AMR modem installed to my ECS K7S5a mb with an XP 1800. I've had not problems whatsoever and actually connect at a faster speed that with an external modem (46666 vs 44000). Thing to keep in mind is that the AMR modem card is software-controlled but if you have a current processor then it should be transparent for CPU usage. I opted for an AMR modem as it keeps my PCI slots open for other stuff and I awnted to take advantage of the mb support for the AMR slot.

[BipolarBill]

Real men use external serial modems. :D

[SnomanJack]

Additional thought, the onboard sound is acceptable for my needs if you throw a decent speaker/subwoofer onto your system. The onboard video I wouldn't even touch, it uses CPU and system RAM to do its work so it's a bottleneck. My mb has onboard sound but video is via AGP and my GeForce2 MX400. At some point I plan on adding a new soundcard to enrich the audio experience but at the least my speaker/subwoofer setup still shakes the house regardless.

[Mutant_Donkey]

i have one of em ac'97 chips on my boards, but i decided to get a sb pci 512. made no diiference except for EAX.

[Paco103]

REAL men don't need to show off their big package, tucked away inside is fine for us :D

[Strawbs]

Real Men have a broadband connection and a 5.1 surround sound set-up. :D

[Peter M]

The DAA, AMR and CNR modems that PC-Chips and ECS use with their boards are fine. They provide good throughput, are free (PC-Chips) or almost free (ECS), and although entirely CPU driven hardly make a dent in a current CPU's processing power.

The close coupling to the system chipset makes them create zero PCI bus load. But no win without a loss - they have higher round trip delay (aka ping latency) than modems that use their own brain.

There seem to be early V.92 drivers floating around for these modems btw.

btw, if someone says they're ****, there is a 99.99 percent chance that it's actually that person's phone line and inhouse cabling that is.

regards, Peter

[Paco103]

I think Strawbs wins the "Geek Man 02" competition for the "real man's modem!"

As far as the win modem thing - I don't have AMR, but I do have PCI winmodem - and I know that the line makes a big difference with that - as does your ISP. I can't get 56K out here no matter what I use, I top out at around 26-27k. The CPU load of any modem might as well be overlooked though - on a modern CPU - I haven't found a single monitor that can actually detect the amount the modem uses. And if you know where to get a good AMR modem cheap I'd like to know - just so I can free up PCI slots

[$1500-P4 gamer]

Originally posted by Peter Missel
The DAA, AMR and CNR modems that PC-Chips and ECS use with their boards are fine. They provide good throughput, are free (PC-Chips) or almost free (ECS), and although entirely CPU driven hardly make a dent in a current CPU's processing power.

The close coupling to the system chipset makes them create zero PCI bus load. But no win without a loss - they have higher round trip delay (aka ping latency) than modems that use their own brain.

There seem to be early V.92 drivers floating around for these modems btw.

btw, if someone says they're ****, there is a 99.99 percent chance that it's actually that person's phone line and inhouse cabling that is.

regards, Peter

I agree. My moms is a pcchips mobo and I am running the built in modem without a prob. She has no connections problems and the speed is just fine. She downloads at the same rate as me on my external usr sportster modem. By the way folks the only advantages to a external are A) you can reset the modem without haveing to reboot the sys. B) they are better for gameing since they have their own cpu-less load on sys as they run on a 486 33mhz even and I believe the ping rate is better.;) :t

The only thing I hate about here PCCHIPS748lmrt (xcell 2000) mobo is the fact that the mem benches at 120mb/sec. which is AWFULL! My 440bx scored over 400mb/sec. and seh's got a cellII 800 with 100fsb, I'm comparing it to my old sys which was a P3 600mhz/100fsb Aopen on 440bx. If I set the cas from 3-2 it shows no dif. in bench. If I set the speed from 12ns to 6ns! it shows no gain. I have flashed the bios and still no change-err.It shows too because stuff mem intensive slows down big time. But anything cpu intensive flys. Really bumbing me out cause her sys other than the mobo is really good. I know its gotta be only 1 way and I want it to run at 4-way mem interleave-but alas its a no go! Thinking of grabbing her a Gainward mobo.;)

[Bellbus]

Thanks, I think I'll stick with a PCI Hardware modem (Bill, external modems have the problem of creating yet more clutter of cables and plugs!). I don't gain a PCI slot by using a AMR modem, because it shares the PCI 6 slot.

The PC Chips modems I'm refering to are the old Super Socket 7 LMR boards. 3 people in our area had them and they all suffered from the same thing.

The connection speed started great, but then gradually slowed down to a snails pace (to the stage they almost stopped!). It got so bad, they all fitted PCI modems which got rid of the problem. They may have improved them by now (i still wouldn't use them).

As for it being the 'User', I don't think so. Modems aren't exactly complex pieces of kit to get working. Phone line quality could play a part, except the other modems were not effected (Connection speeds are around 44K - 48.6K which is pretty good as far as I'm aware).

Onboard sound. I Have this on several boards on my home network (Via 686A and 686B), but it's DOS Legacy support (which a lot of you probably don't need) was a little touchy. However, I use old DOS software and emulators so this was a problem (solved by a cheapo Soundblaster 128 card).

Onboard Video, to be fair I've heard the new Nvidia onboard motherboards are OK (except being touchy about the RAM used), but as for the rest, people I know have had problem after problem with this (like resolutions constantly switching back to 640x480, Screen Waves 0 vertical lines have a Zig-Zag wave look to them). Again, this refers back to SS7 boards, and SIS embedded Video, I 'aint seen the onboard Savage 4 chipset in action (because previous experiences have put me off for life!) which is the more common chipset now.

[Peter M]

Bellbus, these modem drivers have improved a lot (and they're still compatible to those older CMI sound chip driven DAA modem risers) from where they started. Actually they did so very quickly - at the time I was giving people 598LMR boards, the drivers were good already (and maintained a higher throughput than my own $100 industrial grade external modem, which freaked me out kind of).

Same comment for everything else onboard - wavy display is an EMI problem inside the case, mostly poor power supply, onboard sound has just as wide a range of CPU-driven-ness and output quality as sound cards do.

Integrated VGA however is always very bandwidth limited, and never as fast as a decent graphics card that has its own RAM.

$15-gamer, that answers your question as well. You got the graphics engine stealing RAM bandwidth - the higher the resolution, color depth, and refresh rate, the more. It isn't as bad in real life as the usual memory throughput benchmarks make it look though. Of course these boards aren't made for effective number crunching - it's not a matter of "board sucks", but of poor choice of tool. If you want performance, build a performance system, not a baseline doesthejob thing.

regards, Peter

[Bellbus]

Hi Peter,

As far as I'm concerned the 'Poor Tools' are the PC Chips boards. You blame drivers, which were updated no no avail on these SS7 boards. Of course, I needed a second mortgage to pay for the phone bill because the PC Chips site is so slow to download!.. I had several people moaning about the Celeron boards as well.

I simply would not recommend PC Chips LMR boards to any games user. If you think the LMR boards are anywhere near the quality of other manufacturers, your deluded. Yes, there cheap for office users, but that it. There's no point in coughing up for a good processor, for the board to apply an anchor to it.

You may as well go out and get a sports car, fit it with the best alloy's, trubo charger and the put an old granny behind the wheel driving! It has the potential for speed, but your not getting it.

Onboard Sound is had to avoid (although 2 of my boards are Athlon Abit KG7 - No onboard anything. Fantastic Boards, by the way), and the chipsets available seem to always be AC97 Via 686 or 8223. So the quality doesn't vary too much between boards

Onboard video is notoriously slow for games users & I would simply recommend it to nobody. The Problems I've had with the VGA always dissappear when you switch to a 'Real Card', so as fas as I'm concerned - its the problem not the other pieces.

Personally, my home built systems are customised to my taste - no onboard nothing & decent but cheap 64MB Geoforce 2 mx400 cards.

KG7 cost £35 + Soundblaster £9 (+VAT) + £10 for Linksys LAN + £10 for basic H/W Modem. This 'aint far off the cost a LMR board. I know which I'd rather have.



Ya know, I'm off the point - thanks everyone for the explanation of AMR modems - I thought they would have at least come advantages, but I can't really see them. The cost the same as a cheap Hardware modem in the UK.

[$1500-P4 gamer]

Thanks! That makes sense that the vid would rob it of bandwidth!
Anyhow a freind is wanting a upgrade. He has a gateway P166mhz. He doesnt game-# crunch or anything of the sort. Simply needs it for the net to do research for work. I told him I'd give him that mobo and a slot1 366A mhz celeron and 128mb ram for $30. Not a bad deal I dont think. Anyhow its made just for his needs! So Its a perfect opertunity to get rid of it. Dont get me wrong I didnt expect top notch from it as it was a all in one solution mobo. I know when its all intergrated you are limited to + of pci slots (1 in this case) no agp etc. So its no biggy-Gainward here I come!

P.S. Do you think I should just give him my 2+2mb upgrade pci vid card (old cad card I believe) for now till he can get better as he doesnt game and it supports the res. that his 15" mon. goes to and 32bit color. That should give it a little more speed right, being that I then disable the onboard video (which you can I checked)?:confused: :t

[otheos]

KG7 cost £35 + Soundblaster £9 (+VAT) + £10 for Linksys LAN + £10 for basic H/W Modem

Hey, you'd care to share your supplier as the prices you're quoting are really low and wouldn't mind taking up the option :)

[Bellbus]

My Suppliers are:

KG7 (Aria) (no longer sold - they were getting rid of them)
Sound Cards (Scan)

www.aria.co.uk
There is a £6 postage chg with this lot


my other suppliers are:

www.dabs.co.uk (main advantage is postage free to £3)
www.scan.co.uk (postage £7, but are cheap)
www.watford.co.uk (postage free to £3)
www.cclcomputers.co.uk (never ordered online, but over the phone).

Each supplier has its advantages.

Aria and Scan do one day specials which bring down the prices even further.

[otheos]

KG7 (no longer sold - they were getting rid of them)

That's what I thought :(

Thanks for the links :)

[Bellbus]

www.aria.co.uk

If you actually bothered looking:

They do offer 2 other boards:

AriaNet SDRAM Onboard sound (AC97) & Video (Savage 4) = £35
AriaNet DDRam XP2100 compatible (no Video) = £38
Eilte K7 5SA £39.00

Duron Chips: 1.1 Ghz £30 & 850Mhz £23.50
300Watt Cases: from £16.50
Geoforce 2 64mb mx 400 from £35.00
Ram: £20-£30


I'd spend a little extra and aim at the DDR model. Even the SDRAM model has an AGP slot on it (thankfully).

AriaNet are rebranded boards from other supplier (like the Dabs Value range), but If you read the reviews from customers they are liked.


The AriaNet Onboard sound & Video was £30 yesterday in a 1 day special (and again if you read the reviews most customers liked this board over the PC Chips). Request it (through the One Day button) & they'll put it on the specials again.

Also try the Bargain Basement - sometimes the deals are naff othertimes they good. Prices vary a lot (even for the same goods)

And yes, I look at each shops prices daily looking for specials - a little effort can save you money. I'm not going to apologise for that, with the quantity of stuff I buy it makes a big difference.

To give you an idea of targets:
Scan - Network cards start at £4.95
Sound Blaster 9.95 (comes into 1 day deal every 3-4 days at 8.95)

Aria - Network Cards start ay £6.00
Sound Blaster 11.00

Aria is best for boards & CPU's by far, but their stock is always changing.

Dabs - Geoforce 2 64mb mx400 £33.00

[Bellbus]

Just in case your interested Otheos.

www.aria.co.uk are selling the KG7 boards for £35 again (click on the bargain basement).

[Peter M]

Sure any KM266 based board is somewhat faster than PC-Chips M810, not much though - ProSavage isn't exactly a fast 3D engine ... but further down the list, there is the much newer PC-Chips M841 too. For 54 quid, you get an SiS 740 board with very decent embedded 3D (lots faster than VIA KM266), DDR and SDR RAM slots, LAN, sound, and an AMR modem right out of the box.

btw, bellbus, the old socket-7 LMR boards DAA modem driver is the same one as for the newer boards w/ AMR modems. It's the same PCTel softmodem, driven by either the C-Media sound chip on the DAA solution, or by the chipset embedded modem data mover in the AMR and CNR cases.

The one thing about PC-Chips is that you have to know your stuff. PC-Chips are about OEM business, there is no end user support beyond BIOS and driver updates.

Then of course there's the never ending debate about onboard VGA being ****. It's not. People make **** choices, choosing an inadequate solution for their problem, and then come back saying the product is bad. It isn't, their choice was. Lots of people do play games with integrated VGA ... but for the enthusiast who wants high resolution gaming, they're simply the wrong product. Mind the difference, wrong does not equal bad.

regards, Peter

[Bellbus]

I'm not too sure why this argument has come up again (it's a personal opnion), I was just passing a message to Otheos.

Your answer is fair enough, but the main problem with onboard VGA is that your assuming everyone knows what it is they are buying. A lot of newbies walk into a shop and buy a cheap PC unaware that it may be inappropriate for the kids. A lot of shops sales people simply don't mention or know embedded items are inappropriate for the kids gaming machine.

If you don't want performance, buy yourself an old 2nd hand machine, you sure as hell don't need a 1.4GHz processor upwards.

The fact it works, is not an agruement that it is good. If you buy a high end processor - you expect decent performance. Having an onboard Video may work - but whats the point of buying the high end processor just to have a giant bottleneck at the Video card end of things. With the exception of office machines most users have many uses. A bad onboard graphics card also hits Video editing, Graphics packages and general stability of the machine.

As I said before, I've never seen the Savage onboard system running.

There are some basic facts:
It is well known that onboard Video is never the equivalent to a standalone card of equivalent chipset.

Even the new Nividia onboard VGA has been proven to be slower than the separate card despite having the same chipset. Now you can't argue that people buying this motherbaord is doing so because they don't want to play games. (I should point out, these motherboards are still supposed to be very good, just not as fast as a standalone)

The same is of the newer Savage 4 chip sets.

The old SIS onboard video wasn't just a little naff at games it was useless.


Many PC Chips board models do not even come with an AGP slot making future expansion or Sale of machine difficult. Buying a new PCI Graphics Card costs 1.5 to 3 times as much for less power (thats if you can even find it).

PC chips boards are for Office applications only, for a household, who will have various uses (parents & kids). My objection to them dwindles a little as long as the board has a AGP slot to switch the **** thing off (but you often sacrifice PCI slots with onboard devices).


At the end of the day, these things are inferior. With the cost of the individual components coming down all the time (just look at the Geoforce cards), why go for an inferior solution for the sake of, say £30. You've probably just spent £2-300+ on a full machine - an little extra at the start will give higher resale, better future proofing and faster performance.

You can't predict the future use of the machine, so keep the option open. With such a little cost difference, it's not so much a case of inappropriate buying as of keeping the machine as future proof as possible.

You also have the point that if any component of the boards goes 'pop' your stuck needing virtually an entire new machine.
At least with standalone, you can buy the piece (and probably upgrade at the same time) at very little cost.

In the old days, yes onboard was economical, but now I consider it a bad buy.

[Peter M]

Ask yourself: Why are people so ignorant about SYSTEM performance, and go after "fast processors" only? Yes. Intel's marketing. Uneducated shop personell doesn't help it either.

So as a buyer, either do your homework and find out about what you want, consult an expert, or buy at a shop with salesmen who know their stuff. The latter are becoming rare, because everyone goes by price. (Then again, it allows me to run a lucrative consulting business in my spare time, telling people what to buy and where :))

If you combine an integrated mainboard with a high end processor, again, stupid move, not the board's fault.

"Old" SiS onboard VGA stinks? Which one, the 1996 "5598", the 1998 "530"? Certainly not 2000's "730", nor today's "740".

At the time, each of those was suitable for low end to mid range gaming. If you try to run demanding new games on old lowend stuff, again, bad move.

Cost efficience is way more than you estimated. Try to get mainboard, 64 MByte VGA, sound, 10/100 LAN, and modem for anywhere near 100 quid. I guess you won't manage, although this is already nearly twice as much as what the 841L costs.

Then there are things like 810CL, which upon everything else integrates a Duron-900 including heatsink and fan. 69 quid. Try to beat that. Runs on a 200 watt PSU btw, which shaves the cost down further. Sure, it's not upgradable, but outside the gaming community, noone who got a machine that suits their needs (!) ever does that - beyond RAM and HDD upgrades, and extra peripherals that is.

Admit to it - these products aren't **** in themselves, they have their market. Sure, if you buy a Citroen Saxo to use for your piano moving business, you're going to have a problem. But it's certainly not the little car's fault.

regards, Peter

[Bellbus]

Peter mate,

I think we'll have to agree to disagree on this one.

The only market these boards are aimed at, are the people who should be looking to get a £100 complete 2nd hand system and save their pennies.

as for a system under 1 £100 (excl VAT), here goes:

These are the prices at www.aria.co.uk today.

Abit KG7 £35.00
SB 128 10.00
Generic NIC 6.00
Basic modem 9.00 (18 for Hardware)
Geoforce 2 35.00

£95.00


Not to mention I will have 64Mb more than you. Why, 64MB. If you used the onboard Video 64 RAM as stated you will lose 64Mb from main memory.


As for not getting a high end processor, try looking at the shops. Buying a processor under a 900mhz is impossible. This is still a very fast processor for the use you are suggesting.

As for being brainwashed by Intel - I don't think do, I general user (games/Rendering/Programming/Docmentation) and I personally only use 2x AMD 900Mhz & an old K6-2 550Mhz. Why to I get away with such a low/medium processors - Decent components!

Its not about just 'Performance', its about performance for you £.

You can buy a Fiat Panda cheaper than a Ford KA. But a few years down the road when the Fiat is a rusting hulk thats been a pain to drive because its slow (but it does move) and you have to replace it, you'll see the bloke who spent that little extra driving a KA. Overall he got a better product in the long run - Yes he paid a little extra at the start, but it can be worth it.

I'm not suggesting he buts a GTI, were you'd lose a fortune in the first years (like buying a new top end CPU), just a comfortable vehicle.

The difference with quality boards is that your given the option to change the 'engine' further down the line when they get cheaper without it being hindered by the weak infrastructure of the vehicle.