Chipsets Intel 815 and 815E
Analyzing and criticizing the characteristics
Let's start by the end, the differences between 815 and 815E. In our sincere opinion, to 99,99 % of the mortal ones the difference between ATA-66 and ATA-100 they will be indistinguishable, since as it is always a question of the maximum theoretical transference between the disc and the system.
To notice some difference, the disc should turn internally like minimum 7.200 rpm (preferably, to 10.000) and to make a use more than intensive of the same one. In fact, with the normal hard disks difference does not even exist scarcely between ATA-33 and ATA-66 (certainly, the terms "It ties - xxx" y "UltraDMA-xxx" is considered to be synonymous).
More interesting turn out to be the ports extra USB... but only if we are going to use them, skylight. If it has enough devices USB and uses them simultaneously, it will notice major fluency connecting them to different ports; but if it has, for example, only one mouse, a joystick and a scanner USB, two ports are enough to him undoubtedly.
And as for the groove CNR (heiress of the slightly successful AMR) and, only they serve to the checker of integrated network to reduce in an infinitesimal way the cost of the system, at the cost of consuming time and resources of the microprocessor (that, certainly, is where Intel has his principal business).
Finally, it is in what they have in common both chipsets where the advances are opposite to the BX: his structure Intel Architecture Hub, in contrast + Southbridge, they offers the band double to the outstanding figure Northbridge that the BX, something that results from importance if the microprocessor is very rapid and many (MANY) tasks are executed simultaneously.
Also the divisor support is important 1/2 for the AGP, cards AGP are able to be used with a 133 MHz bus without having that overclockearlas (in the BX, with divisor 2/3, they were working to 89 MHz instead of to 66 official MHz) and the support of memory PC133, without translators (MTH) who spoil the yield.
... But there are advances and regressions, because these chipsets "only" support a maximum of 512 MB of memory (the BX, 1 GB); it is a lot of memory, but certain professional uses need more. Also, hardly we will find badges with 4 grooves DIMM, the majority they will have 3 and some only 2. And in addition, they do not support dual badges (the BX yes). Undoubtedly they are not for use highly professional... because Intel does not want it, probably.
Yield: normal and graphic
Of course, it is brilliant that a chipset does many things, but the ideal thing is that also it does them quickly. In case of the 815, there does not seem to be greatly problem: they are at least comparable (if not Superiors) to the BX, to the ROUTE Apollo 133rd and even to the Intel 820 to memory Rambus, and undoubtedly much better than 820 to memory SDRAM.
The previous thing is quite logical: the memory Rambus is not for anything the marvel that was said, and a chipset more modern than the BX should be also more rapid. 820 it it would have been, but one took the direct SDRAM support from him and to have to use the chip "translator" MTH was slowing down him very much.
But ATTENTION: the previous thing is valid only if we use a graphic card external AGP, because the yield of the integrated graphic checker is VERY LOW. Unfortunately, badges still do not sell 815/815E, but the following taken graph of Sharky Extreme, a web site of any confidence, it indicates that his yield in graphs 3D with the integrated checker ("onboard) is simply bajísimo:
Since we saw in our previous article on chips nVidia, in the same test an Athlon to 700 MHz using a card Intel 740 it was obtaining 25,2 fps, what indicates that practically we are before the same graphic, clearly antiquated chip. Anyway, the yield is more that sufficient for applications ofimáticas or to play occasionally some game, but if he wants to play "seriously" he will need to use the groove AGP.
Good, Intel has triumphed... in 80 %. The chipsets 815 are in general rapids and they have all the modern innovations, but also they have some important lacks; and the worst thing is that the above mentioned lacks seem provoked by Intel.
If they will support more memory, more than 1 processor and they did not have built-in graphic card, they would be ideal; how it is not the case, let's say that they turn out to be advisable for almost all the users, BUT depending on his PRICE.
The question is that the chipsets ROUTE are very cheap and of quite reasonable yield, while the Intel usually cost more; and it is of supposing that to incorporate a graphic checker, is used or not, it costs a money that Intel is not going to give.
If he is a clerk or a slightly ambitious domestic user and finds one of these badges cheap: forward! The graphic checker will serve a time to him, and it will always be able to update it in the future. If on the other hand he is sure that he needs more graphic potency (as it is the case of most of the players and professionals), the decision will depend on the price of the badge and on if there are enough to him 512 MB of memory and 1 processor.
In any case, it is a good beginning; we will see if Intel continues for this way.