ECS GF8200A (NVIDIA GeForce 8200) with integrated graphics
Author:
Date: 03.08.2008 |
|
Performance tests
It turned out that while determining the starting FSB speed, the boards set it at a high enough precision.
In our test setup, we used the following hardware:
| Test setup |
| CPU |
AMD Athlon64 3500+ Socket AM2 2.2 GHz (Orleans core, stepping DH-F2) |
| Cooler |
Gigabyte 3D Cooler GP Edition |
| Video card |
Integrated graphic core GeForce 7025
Integrated graphic core GeForce 8200 |
| Sound card |
- |
| HDD |
Samsung HD160JJ |
| Memory |
2x 1024 MB GoodRAM DDR2 GP1066D264L5/2GDC |
| Power supply unit |
FSP 550 W |
| OS |
MS Vista |
Let's first take a look at the results of synthetic benchmarks.
Now on to the gaming benchmarks.
Tests of application software.
Video encoding (DivX, Xvid) was measured in seconds, i.e. the less the better.
Data compression (WinRAR) was measured in KB/sec, i.e. the more, the better.
In general, the performance of the integrated video core NVIDIA GeForce 8200 is on par with its direct competitor - AMD 780G. Therefore, at this stage we can make a conclusion as to which of these two products are more preferable. Apart from the speed, we should also verify the remaining features and technologies of the GeForce 8200 (e.g., the efficiency of Hybrid SLI).
As regards comparison of GeForce 8200 versus the previous generation of NVIDIA's integrated chipsets, we can make only one conclusion: an undisputable victory at both the speed and the functionality. The only 3D application where the GeForce 7025 chipset can oppose against the GeForce 8200 is the game "Company of Heroes". But in reality that is not quite the case, because GeForce 8200 'honestly' displayed image in DirectX 10.0, whereas with 7025 the game enabled the 'lite' mode of rendering (since GeForce 7025 does not support DirectX 10.0). If the mode weren't there, the results would have been the same as in the game "PT Boats".
Final Words
First, we make conclusions regarding the GeForce 8200 chipset. In our view, it is quite a successful product and motherboards built on its base will be able competing successfully against boards based on AMD 780G. Besides, NVIDIA is planning to release two more modifications: GeForce 8100 and GeForce 8300, which will let the manufacturers to expand the assortment of motherboards substantially.
Now conclusions regarding abit A-N68SV and ECS GF8200A. Above all, the boards are within different pricing categories. The abit board cost about $65, whereas the prices for ECS GF8200A are a bit above $86. So, if you are into saving at any rate, the choice is evidently in favor of abit A-N68SV (or another one based on GeForce 7xxx). By the way, the $23 difference today is the difference between dual-core Athlon64 X2 4000+ and Athlon64 X2 5000+. If the $23 is not a critical amount, it's better to choose a board based on GeForce 8200. In particular, buying an ECS GF8200A we get more expansion slots, 8-channel audio (instead of 6-channel), six SerialATA links (instead of four), a Gigabit LAN controller (instead of 10/100 Mbit), twelve USB 2.0 ports (instead of ten), and four slots for memory modules (merely two on the abit board). And of course the user gets a much faster (about 2 times as fast) and functional integrated video core with support for DirectX 10.0, HybridSLI, etc.
As regards overclocking, at that we ascertain an provisional equality because of the lack (and incorrect functioning) of the feature for multiplier adjustment.
Conclusion
|
abit A-N68SV
|
ECS GF8200A
|
Pros:
- high stability;
- one PCI Express x16 slot;
- support for SerialATA II (4 lines; RAID nForce 630i);
- support for one P-ATA link (nForce 630i);
- low price.
Cons:
The board's specific features:
- not bad kit of overclocking tools but poor results.
|
Pros:
- high stability and good performance level;
- graphic core NVIDIA GeForce 8200 and one PCI Express x16 slot;
- support for SerialATA II (6 links, RAID; GeForce 8200);
- support for one P-ATA link (GeForce 8200);
- integrated 8-channel audio and Gigabit Ethernet LAN controller;
- support for the USB2.0 interface (12 ports).
Cons:
The board's specific features:
- not bad kit of overclocking tools but poor results.
|
- Discuss the material in the conference
 |
Content: |
 |
|
|
Top Stories: |
|
 |
|
MoBo:
|
|
|
|
VGA Card:
|
|
|
|
CPU & Memory:
|
|
|
