Results 1 to 10 of 10

Thread: AMD SouthBridges - SB600 vs SB700 vs SB750 - whats the difference ?

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Bangalore, India
    Posts
    102

    Default AMD SouthBridges - SB600 vs SB700 vs SB750 - whats the difference ?

    The question is pretty simple I suppose. What is the difference between the three southbridges found on AMD motherboards ? I know for one that the 600 indicates that its in the 6xx chipset line and the 700 indicates that its in the 7xx chipset line. But in real world terms, what is the difference between the three ?

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Linuxland
    Posts
    5,182

    Default

    There was some SATA slowness in the SB600. I don't remember how much, it was around ~10% slower than other chipsets IIRC, but this was fixed in SB700.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Third Rock from the Sun
    Posts
    6,584

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by curaga View Post
    There was some SATA slowness in the SB600. I don't remember how much, it was around ~10% slower than other chipsets IIRC, but this was fixed in SB700.
    Nope same crap. http://techreport.com/articles.x/14261/10

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Bangalore, India
    Posts
    102

    Default

    I noticed that SB750 has something called ACC for overclockers.

    Out of two 780G boards I saw which intrested me, one was 25% cheaper than the other, because the expensive one had SB750 and the cheap one had SB700.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Bangalore, India
    Posts
    102

    Default

    another question: In AMD roadmaps, I see all future stuff using SB710. Any idea what it is ?

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Toronto-ish
    Posts
    7,514

    Default

    I think SB710 is like SB700 but with the addition of the advanced clock generation (for better overclocking) and SuperI/O (floppy, parallel, serial, mouse/kbd ports).

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    South Africa
    Posts
    234

    Default

    SB600 had much slower USB performance, much less ports, and only supported SATA1.

    SB700 has more & faster USB, more SATA ports, uses less power.

    SB750 = SB700 with ACC (Advanced Clock Calibration) and RAID5 support.

    For most users SB700 will be the ideal choice. If you want to over-clock the SB750 seems to help a lot.

    I believe the SB710 is an SB750 without RAID5.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    88

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by grigi View Post
    SB600 had much slower USB performance, much less ports, and only supported SATA1.
    SB600 supports SATA2. It for sure has some USB problems, though.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Third Rock from the Sun
    Posts
    6,584

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SavageX View Post
    SB600 supports SATA2. It for sure has some USB problems, though.
    Ya it supports Sata 2, but it cannot however do 64-bit DMA transfers. The chip claims it can but in reality it can't. That's why when you boot into a SB600 based system you get a message telling you from the kernel saying 64-bit dma has been disabled and reverts to 32-bit.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Bangalore, India
    Posts
    102

    Default

    Hmm... so SB600 looks like a dead goat.

    And I doubt SB700 would be useful since Linux users are usually power users and overclocking is something which many of us may be naturally be inclined to do since we use a geeky OS.

    SB750 seems to have it all, but is it worth the increase in cost, by around 20-25$ compared to SB700 ?

    As for SB710, I highly look forward for it, since it seems perfect. Whats its expected price ?

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •