AMD's 890GX Chipset - Same Graphics, Better South Bridge
by Anand Lal Shimpi on March 2, 2010 4:36 AM EST- Posted in
- CPUs
Better Suited for USB 3.0?
A little known fact is that Intel’s P55/H55/H57 chipsets run their PCIe lanes at 2.5GT/s. Meaning that a PCIe x1 lane off the chipset only offers 250MB/s in each direction. Aggregate bandwidth is 500MB/s, but that’s only attained if you’re reading at 250MB/s and writing at 250MB/s.
AMD runs all of its PCIe lanes at 5.0GT/s, so a single PCIe x1 slot offers 500MB/s up and 500MB/s down.
Neither AMD nor Intel have integrated USB 3.0 controllers, so they must rely on NEC’s PCIe-to-USB3 controller. AMD’s 890GX chipset offers roughly twice the bandwidth between the chipset and the USB 3 controller.
Today that doesn’t amount to anything. No currently available USB 3.0 peripheral can saturate PCIe 1.0 speeds, but down the road AMD’s approach will avoid any bottlenecks. I’d expect this to start being a problem towards the end of 2010 and into 2011 as we start getting more ONFI 2.0 NAND equipped SSDs that can boast 300MB/s+ read speeds.
USB Performance
No chipset launch article is complete without a never-before-seen problem and we think we hit our quota. We stumbled across an issue using Sharkoon’s USB QuickPort and our ASUS M4A89GTD Pro motherboard; hot-plugging the device into a USB 2.0 port results in a system crash whether you’re in the OS, during POST or within BIOS. The USB 3.0 ports will occasionally work with the drive and we did manage to scramble a quick test (see the graph at the bottom of the page), although the symptoms are largely the same (system hangs, loss of display).
Now, the Sharkoon QuickPort comes with its own power adapter (which it needs to work) and is fully USB 2.0/3.0 compatible, so it should not draw excessive current from the USB ports. There’s always the chance that we’ve got a faulty unit, but bear in mind that it works perfectly with nine motherboards featuring various chipsets.
One thing we noticed is that the M4A89GTD Pro seems to cut power to other USB devices briefly when plug we plug the QuickPort cable into a socket. We tried plugging the drive in while the motherboard is powered down, doing so does allow it to post and enter the OS. After that, Windows finds our USB hard drive and proceeds to load drivers. Trouble is that the drive is not displayed in the ‘My Computer’ menu, and trying to access the drive via the Disk Management snap-in does not work either; we’re continually greeted with a refresh error.
We’re leaning towards the notion of a faulty motherboard at present. ASUS have been notified and have dispatched a new board which should arrive with us shortly. In the meantime, all we’ve got to show for our efforts is 1GB file transfer time over the AMD SB850 vs. Intel’s H55/H57 to the NEC D720200F1 USB 3.0 port using a couple of 1TB Western Digital Caviar hard drives. We know it’s far from an ideal test but will have to suffice for today - sorry folks!
There’s little to divide the boards in a one 1GB file transfer using the SATA HDD’s, it’s obvious that the drives are a bottleneck. We’re aiming to put a couple of 6G SATA drives through their paces on these boards in the near future so we get a better idea of what USB 3 technology can do.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
65 Comments
View All Comments
semo - Tuesday, March 2, 2010 - link
I'm not aware if the motherboard header pin configurations for USB 3.0 have been standardized yet. I'm sure there will be a period when every maker will come up with their own design until we settle on a single oneglockjs - Tuesday, March 2, 2010 - link
i don't feel so bad in being impatient and buying one of the gigabyte 333's...790xta to be exact. looks like i didnt miss much :Dsemilobster - Tuesday, March 2, 2010 - link
Great review Anand! When can we expect a review of the new Hybrid-Crossfire with the 5450? How did they make this work? So far Hybrid-Crossfire has only worked with other RV610 based GPUs (the RV620 was just a slightly modified RV610)Spoelie - Tuesday, March 2, 2010 - link
Extremely disappointed. Still the uncompetitive SATA performance, no USB3, no ACC and the same integrated graphics performance we had back in 2007, 2 and a half years ago.For a company that's behind on cpu performance and tries (tried?) to push the platform "advantage", this is one lackluster platform. It's like they've given up altogether.
I've had AMD systems for the past years, but 2010 seems to be time to switch, and it pains me :(
Alouette Radeon - Wednesday, March 10, 2010 - link
Let me see if I understand this correctly. You're going to switch to the criminal organization known as Intel because AMD hasn't upgraded their SATA? You're kidding right? No spinning hard drive today can keep up with the SATA speeds as they are except for SSDs and you're whining about that? Don't even get me started on the fact that the Radeon HD 4290 is still the top performing IGP with DX10.1 added. Do you really think you'd prefer an Intel GMA??? My god, what rock do you live under? Just for ideological purposes alone, I won't touch Intel or nVidia until they clean themselves up. Dishonesty in a corporation pisses me off more than anything and if you've seen the way Intel has conducted itself in the last 10 years you wouldn't be so quick to switch. Sure, switch to Intel, increase their market share, let AMD die and then we'll all be happy with Intel having a monopoly and dictating to us what we get as they slow technological advancement down and raise prices on everything all because you felt inadequate without SATA performance numbers that are meaningless because there's no hard drives that can take advantage of them! With knuckleheads like you in the world, it's no wonder we're where we are today!AznBoi36 - Tuesday, March 2, 2010 - link
I don't really see a problem with AMD's platform. Sure their SATA performance isn't as great as Intels; but like Anand said - as long as you aren't running the latest SSDs then the SATA performance difference between AMD/Intel is negligible.And yeah, these guys are sitting on their asses as far as chipsets go. How long has ICH/r10 been out? A long time now. I'm still waiting for 8 SATA ports with RAID6. That's probably a long time coming though.
If you want ACC, then you can still pick up an older 790/785 board. Even my old Gigabyte MA785GM-US2H has it. The only benefit I see with the new 890GX is if you need native SATA3 RAID and more than 2 ports (all other boards use the marvel controller and have only 2 SATA3 ports with RAID 0/1/0+1)
Mr Perfect - Wednesday, March 3, 2010 - link
The problem is that native SATA 6gbps for SSDs is exactly why I was interested in the 8 series. It's back to 3rd party controllers now, which gives AMD no advantage.leexgx - Wednesday, March 3, 2010 - link
but it does support ACC and core unlocker they had an page Just for it (did any one read all of this pre-review before posting)all that amd have done is hid the option now but it still can be done
Griswold - Tuesday, March 2, 2010 - link
Oh yea switch to where the grass has the same color because there are no more significant upgrades between platforms either...They have now all been equally lazy. And lets not talk about nvidia with their endless nfarce rebadging of chipsets from a decade gone by...
Its clear that there is no pressure in the platform business anymore. Nvidia is a joke and AMD / Intel just throw old bones at us. Get used to it. Also because "platform" is becoming more and more meaningless, except for southbridges...
Spoelie - Tuesday, March 2, 2010 - link
I'm not saying Intel has a better platform feature wise, but it has more performance (SATA, CPU) and lower power consumption. AMD used to have a platform advantage, but the last year that was erased. There is absolutely no reason anymore, except for price, to pick AMD at this moment. And you do not want to be in that position in this industry.