What's the difference between Intel Triton II VX and HX chipsets? Which one to buy?
Peter Pelka
Hi,
I'd like to know what's the difference between the Triton II VX and HX
chipsets from Intel, also which one is faster and with which one should
I buy a motherboard?
Thanks for the info.
Pete.
Peter Pelka
Or is that and FX instead of HX, I'm not sure? Anyways I'd really
appreciate any info and clarification.
Thanks.
Pete.
Mark Hahn
> > I'd like to know what's the difference between the Triton II VX and HX
> > chipsets from Intel, also which one is faster and with which one should
> > I buy a motherboard?
> Or is that and FX instead of HX, I'm not sure? Anyways I'd really
> appreciate any info and clarification.
here's a brief summary of the main P5 chipsets:
neptune: ~3 years old and pretty slow. until the 430hx, it was
the only way to build a multi-P5 system, though.
triton (430fx): ~2 years old, and pretty fast. it introduced support
for PB cache and EDO, and had much improved memory and PCI interfaces.
it also frequently comes with the PIIX eide controller, which is quite
fast and capable of busmastering. it's uniprocessor-only, and doesn't
support parity, though.
triton II (430hx): inside a year old, and a little faster than the 430fx.
it mainly just tweaked, with a little better buffering and memory timings.
it also supports error detection and correction and multiprocessors.
triton II (430vx): same age as the 430hx, but mostly inferior. it doesn't
provide quite as agressive buffering, and has slower EDO timings. its
only possible advantage is that it supports SDRAM. but in the presence of
cache, SDRAM provides little benefit to most programs, so...
just for completeness:
Orion: older P6 chipset, which was pathologically buggy for a long time.
reports are that it's fixed now, but... it offers 4-way multiprocessor
support as well as interleaved FPM.
Natoma: newer P6 chipset, which seems to work quite well, and does EDO.
it's limited to 2x multi, though, and does no interleaving.
there are a couple non-Intel P5 and P6 chipsets, but they never seemed
to ship in much quantity...
regards, mark hahn.
--
operator may differ from spokesperson. ha...@neurocog.lrdc.pitt.edu
http://neurocog.lrdc.pitt.edu/~hahn/
John Navas
[POSTED TO comp.sys.intel]
ha...@neurocog.lrdc.pitt.edu (Mark Hahn) wrote:
>Natoma: newer P6 chipset, which seems to work quite well, and does EDO.
>it's limited to 2x multi, though, and does no interleaving.
It also supports BEDO, which is arguably better than interleaving.
--
Best regards,
John mailto:JNa...@NavasGrp.Dublin.CA.US http://www.aimnet.com/~jnavas/
Phil
Peter,
:> Hi,
:>
:>I'd like to know what's the difference between the Triton II VX and HX
:>chipsets from Intel, also which one is faster and with which one should
:>I buy a motherboard?
:>
:>Thanks for the info.
:>
:> Pete.
:>
:>
:> ppe...@wchat.on.ca
:> .
You can find a product overview of all our chipsets at the following:
http://www.intel.com/design/pcisets/
For a tabular summarization of technical characteristics for each
chipset you can check out:
http://www-cs.intel.com/oem_developer/chipsets/pci/general/7279.HTM
Basically, keep in mind the following:
- The VX chipset is designed for home and small office PC platform
while the HX is designed for business use. Therefore, one may not be
necessarily designed to be faster than the other. Instead, the design
and purpose of each chipset is different. For example, the HX focuses
on reliability concerning data and device integrity for high volume
information handling.
- Performance will also depend on what kinds of applications you will
be using (i.e. graphic intensive) and the kind of memory you will be
using. For EDO, the HX will slightly be faster than the VX with EDO.
However, if you have the VX with SDRAM there is a slight performance
increase over the HX with EDO (HX doesn't support SDRAM) in graphic
intensive application. The differences, though, in either case are not
noticeable. The difference in speed is on the order of 1 clock cycle.
Best Regards,
Phil
Intel Application Support
http://www-cs.intel.com/
John Navas
[POSTED TO comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips]
JNa...@NavasGrp.Dublin.CA.US (John Navas) wrote:
>[POSTED TO comp.sys.intel]
>ha...@neurocog.lrdc.pitt.edu (Mark Hahn) wrote:
>
>>Natoma: newer P6 chipset, which seems to work quite well, and does EDO.
>>it's limited to 2x multi, though, and does no interleaving.
>
>It also supports BEDO, which is arguably better than interleaving.
I stand corrected -- while it supports BEDO, Natoma does not meet the tighter
timing requirements, so BEDO is no faster on Natoma than EDO (and therefore a
waste of money).
John Navas
[POSTED TO comp.sys.intel]
Phil <sup...@cs.intel.com> wrote:
>... The differences, though, in either case are not
>noticeable. The difference in speed is on the order of 1 clock cycle.
And that is of course the most important point -- all this discussion about what
is "best" or "fastest" is really much ado about very little.
Stephen Knilans
>noticeable. The difference in speed is on the order of 1 clock cycle.
>
>
>
>
This is interesting! I have heard MANY say that the HX is 10-20% faster than
the VX. Also, intels fax shows that SDRAM has been REALLY hyped, at least
with the VX chipset(wait timings are 7-1-1-1)!!!!! According to live up to
its hypes, I would expect wait timings of 0-0-0-0! Also, the HX shows better
wait timings for EDO than the VX.
Here is the rub though! Calling intel tech support, I was told that HX was
faster, and that the addition of SDRAM to VX eats up SOME of the gain the
HX has over the VX!
Also, 1 machine cycle is a BIG speed up if you mean for every 10 cycles, etc...
If you are talking about RAM access, 1 cycle for each access can mean a LOT.
Is there anyone that has actually run a BENCHMARK on this board? Other than
testing sequential, random ram reads, and 8/16/32 bit BUS I/O with/without
bus mastering, and EIDE speed, and CACHE SPEED, what else is there to test?
One would hope that the only difference is in main memory access anyway.
I mean you DO say that uncached performance is equal to an FX with ASYNC cache.
You also provide timings on the INTEL CPU(which are obviously not including
board bottlenecks). Timings for a CPU(especially like the pentium) are FAR
more complex, and less meaningless in comparison between CPU families, than
motherboard timings.
Maybe you guys just don't want to release meaningful data for fear that someone may actually find that they can't sell the other.
Steve
Bill Porter
Peter Pelka <ppe...@wchat.on.ca> wrote:
>Hi,
>
>I'd like to know what's the difference between the Triton II VX and HX
>chipsets from Intel, also which one is faster and with which one should
>I buy a motherboard?
>
>Thanks for the info.
>
>Pete.
>
>
>ppe...@wchat.on.ca
For a complete comparison go to
http://www.u-net.com/sysdoc/chipset.html#FX-HX-VX
Bill
Phil
Bill,
:> >Hi,
:> >
:>>I'd like to know what's the difference between the Triton II VX and HX
:>>chipsets from Intel, also which one is faster and with which one
:>should
:>>I buy a motherboard?
:> >
:>>Thanks for the info.
:> >
:> >Pete.
:> >
:> >
:> >ppe...@wchat.on.ca
You might want to look at the following URLs:
http://www.intel.com/design/pcisets/
http://www-cs.intel.com/oem_developer/chipsets/pci/general/7279.HTM