Intel Core Duo processor is optimized for multi-threaded applications and multitasking. It is possible torun multiple demanding applications such as graphics-intensive games or serious number-crunching programs - while downloading music or running virus-scanning security programs in the background with this processor.
With an Intel Core Duo processor, a balance of great dual-core computing capabilities and power savings are possible. Its enhanced voltage efficiency supports cooler and quieter system designs as compared to traditional desktop and laptop PCs.Intel® Core™ Duo processor is able to transfer power only to those areas of the processor that need it, thereby enabling laptops to save power and desktops to have thinner, sleeker designs.
The Intel® Core™ Duo processor breaks new ground. Its dual-core technology rewrites the rules of computing, delivering optimized power efficient computing and breakthrough dual-core performance with amazingly low power consumption. Intel Core Duo processor is available in Intel's premium laptop platform, Intel® Centrino® processor technology. The Intel Core Duo processor enables your Intel® Core™2 processor with Viiv™ technology and Intel® Centrino® processor technology multimedia experience to be all the more vibrant. Featuring Intel® Digital Media Boost, the Intel® Core™ Duo processor enables accelerating technologies for applications such as CAD tools, 3D and 2D modeling, video editing, digital music, digital photography and gaming. This is one of the key ingredients that help Intel® Core™2 processor with Viiv™ technology and Intel® Centrino® processor technology to give you a truly rich multimedia experience
ads
HellishDollars
 |
 |
 |
 |
Tuesday, May 5, 2009
Thursday, April 23, 2009
The Latest Processors
AMD Athlon 64 FX-57, Intel Pentium D 820,
Pentium 4 670
It took relatively long to prepare this material, as new processors kept being added to it in the process. We initially planned it as a review of the Pentium 4 670, but then we got hold of the Pentium D 820, and recently of a new single core flagship from AMD: Athlon 64 FX-57. However, despite the significant differences in positioning and performance, we still tried to bring tests of all the above mentioned processors together into a single article. Hopefully, it will have no effect on its content quality regarding each CPU. At first we are going to say a few words about each of the latest models.
Pentium 4 670
It's a logical successor to the Pentium 4 6xx series, one of its closest representatives is the previously reviewed Pentium 4 660. Thus, there is nothing special about it: the same core architecture (Prescott-2M) as in the Pentium 4 660, the same bus clock (800MHz in terms of bandwidth) and the L2 Cache size (2MB), but its clock has grown by another 200 MHz (i.e. up to 3.8 GHz). Judging from the latest (available in Internet) Intel's plans, the Pentium 4 670 must be the last processor in this line, as the 4GHz CPU based on Prescott-2M disappeared from the roadmap of this company last year. However, as Stephen King put it, "sometimes they come back"...
Pentium D 820
It's the lowest CPU in the series of multi-core desktop "non-extreme" processors from Intel. The key difference between the Pentium D and the Pentium XE, as we have already written, is that unlike the latter, Pentium D has two physical cores, but it doesn't support Hyper-Threading. Besides, the Pentium D 820 operates at the lowest clock among the entire series of Prescott-like CPUs: 2.8 GHz. There is nothing new in other respects: it's just a Pentium XE, but without Hyper-Threading. The main peculiarity of the Pentium D series is more than democratic prices (especially considering dual cores): according to the official data from the manufacturer, wholesale prices for Pentium D 820/830/840 currently amount to $241/316/530. For comparison: the wholesale price for the Pentium 4 670 is $851, Athlon 64 FX-57 — $1031. So, Pentium D 820 can quite set up for the title of a "people's dual core processor" (for quite well-off people, though).
Athlon 64 FX-57
The renowned successor to Athlon 64 FX-55 acquired a new 90nm San Diego core (its differences from Venice are minimal) with an improved memory controller and SSE3 support. Besides, the clock has grown by another 200 MHz to reach 2.8 GHz. It's the first Athlon 64 FX manufactured by the 90nm process technology supporting SSE3. It's an indirect sign that this process technology is streamlined to manufacture flagship processors offering the highest performance. From the users' point of view, the new Athlon 64 FX is no different from the previous model: it is installed into the same CPU socket as the previous Athlon 64 FX-55 and makes no additional requirements to a motherboard.
Testing
Testbed configurations
* Processors
o AMD Athlon 64 FX-57 (1 MB L2, 2.8 GHz core)
o AMD Athlon 64 FX-55 (1 MB L2, 2.6 GHz core)
o Intel Pentium eXtreme Edition 840 (2 x 1 MB L2, 800 MHz FSB, 2 x 3.2 GHz core)
o Intel Pentium D 820 (2 x 1 MB L2, 800 MHz FSB, 2 x 2.8 GHz core)
o Intel Pentium 4 670 (2 MB L2, 800 MHz FSB, 3.8 GHz core)
o Intel Pentium 4 eXtreme Edition 3.73 GHz (2 MB L2, 1066 MHz FSB)
o Intel Pentium 4 540J (1 MB L2, 800 MHz FSB, 3.2 GHz core)
o Intel Pentium 4 520J (1 MB L2, 800 MHz FSB, 2.8 GHz core)
* Motherboards
+ Intel D955XBK Desktop Board (Intel 955X)
+ EPoX EP-9PNA+ Ultra (NVIDIA nForce 4 Ultra)
* Memory
o 2x512 MB PC5400 (DDR2-533) DIMM 3-3-3-8 (Corsair)
o 2x512 MB PC3200 (DDR-400) DIMM 2-2-2-5 (Corsair)
* Video card: ATI Radeon X800 (256 MB)
* HDD: Samsung SP1614C (SATA), 7200 rpm, 8 MB Cache
* AC power adapter: FSP 550-60PLN (500-550W)
* Windows XP Professional SP2, DirectX 9.0c
* ATI CATALYST 5.4 (Display Driver 6.14.10.6525)
We selected processors for this article (in a seemingly strange way at first sight) based on the transparent (simply biblical) principle "two of every sort": it's quite logical to compare the Athlon 64 FX-57 with the Athlon 64 FX-55, the "low end dual core" Pentium D 820 with the top dual core processor from the same manufacturer - Pentium XE 840. Every pair of dual core processors was supplemented with a single core processor of a similar architecture and clock (Pentium 4 540/520). And Pentium 4 XE 3.73 GHz was a good match to the top desktop Pentium 4 670, due to the minimum clock differences. That's why this hodgepodge is quite systematic and meets the main comparison challenges, even though it looks a tad heterogeneous at first sight.
Test results
Diagrams with all test results (65 all in all) are published on a separate web page — without comments, just as is. The article provides only summary diagrams that calculate the results of entire test groups into average scores. This approach appeases curiosity of the most inquisitive readers, who are against cutting down the number of test results published in our articles, and still makes the article less motley and graphics-intense.
Pentium 4 670
It took relatively long to prepare this material, as new processors kept being added to it in the process. We initially planned it as a review of the Pentium 4 670, but then we got hold of the Pentium D 820, and recently of a new single core flagship from AMD: Athlon 64 FX-57. However, despite the significant differences in positioning and performance, we still tried to bring tests of all the above mentioned processors together into a single article. Hopefully, it will have no effect on its content quality regarding each CPU. At first we are going to say a few words about each of the latest models.
Pentium 4 670
It's a logical successor to the Pentium 4 6xx series, one of its closest representatives is the previously reviewed Pentium 4 660. Thus, there is nothing special about it: the same core architecture (Prescott-2M) as in the Pentium 4 660, the same bus clock (800MHz in terms of bandwidth) and the L2 Cache size (2MB), but its clock has grown by another 200 MHz (i.e. up to 3.8 GHz). Judging from the latest (available in Internet) Intel's plans, the Pentium 4 670 must be the last processor in this line, as the 4GHz CPU based on Prescott-2M disappeared from the roadmap of this company last year. However, as Stephen King put it, "sometimes they come back"...
Pentium D 820
It's the lowest CPU in the series of multi-core desktop "non-extreme" processors from Intel. The key difference between the Pentium D and the Pentium XE, as we have already written, is that unlike the latter, Pentium D has two physical cores, but it doesn't support Hyper-Threading. Besides, the Pentium D 820 operates at the lowest clock among the entire series of Prescott-like CPUs: 2.8 GHz. There is nothing new in other respects: it's just a Pentium XE, but without Hyper-Threading. The main peculiarity of the Pentium D series is more than democratic prices (especially considering dual cores): according to the official data from the manufacturer, wholesale prices for Pentium D 820/830/840 currently amount to $241/316/530. For comparison: the wholesale price for the Pentium 4 670 is $851, Athlon 64 FX-57 — $1031. So, Pentium D 820 can quite set up for the title of a "people's dual core processor" (for quite well-off people, though).
Athlon 64 FX-57
The renowned successor to Athlon 64 FX-55 acquired a new 90nm San Diego core (its differences from Venice are minimal) with an improved memory controller and SSE3 support. Besides, the clock has grown by another 200 MHz to reach 2.8 GHz. It's the first Athlon 64 FX manufactured by the 90nm process technology supporting SSE3. It's an indirect sign that this process technology is streamlined to manufacture flagship processors offering the highest performance. From the users' point of view, the new Athlon 64 FX is no different from the previous model: it is installed into the same CPU socket as the previous Athlon 64 FX-55 and makes no additional requirements to a motherboard.
Testing
Testbed configurations
* Processors
o AMD Athlon 64 FX-57 (1 MB L2, 2.8 GHz core)
o AMD Athlon 64 FX-55 (1 MB L2, 2.6 GHz core)
o Intel Pentium eXtreme Edition 840 (2 x 1 MB L2, 800 MHz FSB, 2 x 3.2 GHz core)
o Intel Pentium D 820 (2 x 1 MB L2, 800 MHz FSB, 2 x 2.8 GHz core)
o Intel Pentium 4 670 (2 MB L2, 800 MHz FSB, 3.8 GHz core)
o Intel Pentium 4 eXtreme Edition 3.73 GHz (2 MB L2, 1066 MHz FSB)
o Intel Pentium 4 540J (1 MB L2, 800 MHz FSB, 3.2 GHz core)
o Intel Pentium 4 520J (1 MB L2, 800 MHz FSB, 2.8 GHz core)
* Motherboards
+ Intel D955XBK Desktop Board (Intel 955X)
+ EPoX EP-9PNA+ Ultra (NVIDIA nForce 4 Ultra)
* Memory
o 2x512 MB PC5400 (DDR2-533) DIMM 3-3-3-8 (Corsair)
o 2x512 MB PC3200 (DDR-400) DIMM 2-2-2-5 (Corsair)
* Video card: ATI Radeon X800 (256 MB)
* HDD: Samsung SP1614C (SATA), 7200 rpm, 8 MB Cache
* AC power adapter: FSP 550-60PLN (500-550W)
* Windows XP Professional SP2, DirectX 9.0c
* ATI CATALYST 5.4 (Display Driver 6.14.10.6525)
We selected processors for this article (in a seemingly strange way at first sight) based on the transparent (simply biblical) principle "two of every sort": it's quite logical to compare the Athlon 64 FX-57 with the Athlon 64 FX-55, the "low end dual core" Pentium D 820 with the top dual core processor from the same manufacturer - Pentium XE 840. Every pair of dual core processors was supplemented with a single core processor of a similar architecture and clock (Pentium 4 540/520). And Pentium 4 XE 3.73 GHz was a good match to the top desktop Pentium 4 670, due to the minimum clock differences. That's why this hodgepodge is quite systematic and meets the main comparison challenges, even though it looks a tad heterogeneous at first sight.
Test results
Diagrams with all test results (65 all in all) are published on a separate web page — without comments, just as is. The article provides only summary diagrams that calculate the results of entire test groups into average scores. This approach appeases curiosity of the most inquisitive readers, who are against cutting down the number of test results published in our articles, and still makes the article less motley and graphics-intense.
Wednesday, April 22, 2009
INTEL - Mother Board
have purchased a desktop Motherboard of INTEL COMPANY in November 2005 under three years warranty. Now in September 2008, a problem comes in the motherboard—“System booting, proper display but not able to install operating system”. Now the process started to avail the warranty, but instead of repairing/replacement under warranty, Intel is putting allegation on me of mishandling which violates the warranty. Sir, the company is harassing me and held me responsible for the fault occurred. So I need you help to get justice. The entire process so far is as below:
1. On 01 September 2008, the case has been discussed with Intel (apacsupport@mailbox.intel.com) and all the necessary information has provided to them. Against this information, they have created a case No # 8529714 and provided me an order number # 1001689645 to send the motherboard to them for necessary action.
(Here please note that the policy of the company is to receive the faulty parts through Courier only. They have not established any authorize service center or agent to receive the parts. i.e. to say that no physical checking of the part have been made by them in the presence of the consumer.)
2. On 02 September 2008, I sent the Motherboard vide Blue Dart courier company. Please remember that at the time of dispatch the problem was “System booting, proper display but not able to install operating system”. Till 12th September 2008, I waited and then contacted them on the customer care (08028542105) for the status of above case number and came to know that the Motherboard is already sent to me back on 09th September 2008 without any repair or replacement as they found a physical alteration (bending) in one of the pin of the processor assembly. I was shocked and surprised. The System was never gone through any repair since purchased then how this alteration occurred. The matter was discussed with them but they simply deny for any further help and insisted me for the third party repair which is a paid service.
3. On 16th September 2008, I received the parcel from M/S Blue Dart. I installed all the hardware to the motherboard and power it ON. There was no display, No Booting. That means the problem become more typical. Now I watched for the physical alteration (as I was told) and found that there was a bending in pins of the processor assembly. With a use of sewing needle I just restore the pins to their original position and reinstall the processor and power ON the system. What I found was really surprising. The system comes to its state at which it was sent to the company vide above case and order number i.e. “System booting, proper display but not able to install operating system”. This simply proves that there were no physical alteration in the processor assembly at the time it was dispatched to the company. That means the physical alteration may happen due to mishandling at the courier company or at the intel itself. And if it is so they how can the warranty voids and how they deny repairing it under warranty.
4. Sir, this matter is brought into there knowledge by repeating three mails but none of the mail has been replied till date. They are just ignoring the mails. All these mails have been received by them as automatic acknowledgement is received in my mailbox.
5. Sir, as stated above, there is a major drawback in the policy of the company in respect of receiving a faulty part from the consumer. They do not directly receive the faulty part and hence no physical checking has made by them in the presence of the consumer. The faulty part reached to them through courier. Then they check it and decide whether there is any physical damage or not and this has been done in the absence of consumer. Now any physical damage or alteration can be happen due to mishandling by the consumer, by the courier company, by the executive of the company itself or may be intentionally done to void the warranty. Then why only the consumer is held responsible for any physical damage/alteration. In this case, as per the working states of the part before dispatching and after receiving, it is found that there was no physical alteration in the motherboard from the consumer side. So the company cannot deny repair/replace the faulty part.
The copy of the entire mail process is pasted below. Sir the company is denying to provide the warranty and thus I found that I have been cheated. For consumer rights and to get justification, I am presenting this case to you for the necessary and favorable action.
1. On 01 September 2008, the case has been discussed with Intel (apacsupport@mailbox.intel.com) and all the necessary information has provided to them. Against this information, they have created a case No # 8529714 and provided me an order number # 1001689645 to send the motherboard to them for necessary action.
(Here please note that the policy of the company is to receive the faulty parts through Courier only. They have not established any authorize service center or agent to receive the parts. i.e. to say that no physical checking of the part have been made by them in the presence of the consumer.)
2. On 02 September 2008, I sent the Motherboard vide Blue Dart courier company. Please remember that at the time of dispatch the problem was “System booting, proper display but not able to install operating system”. Till 12th September 2008, I waited and then contacted them on the customer care (08028542105) for the status of above case number and came to know that the Motherboard is already sent to me back on 09th September 2008 without any repair or replacement as they found a physical alteration (bending) in one of the pin of the processor assembly. I was shocked and surprised. The System was never gone through any repair since purchased then how this alteration occurred. The matter was discussed with them but they simply deny for any further help and insisted me for the third party repair which is a paid service.
3. On 16th September 2008, I received the parcel from M/S Blue Dart. I installed all the hardware to the motherboard and power it ON. There was no display, No Booting. That means the problem become more typical. Now I watched for the physical alteration (as I was told) and found that there was a bending in pins of the processor assembly. With a use of sewing needle I just restore the pins to their original position and reinstall the processor and power ON the system. What I found was really surprising. The system comes to its state at which it was sent to the company vide above case and order number i.e. “System booting, proper display but not able to install operating system”. This simply proves that there were no physical alteration in the processor assembly at the time it was dispatched to the company. That means the physical alteration may happen due to mishandling at the courier company or at the intel itself. And if it is so they how can the warranty voids and how they deny repairing it under warranty.
4. Sir, this matter is brought into there knowledge by repeating three mails but none of the mail has been replied till date. They are just ignoring the mails. All these mails have been received by them as automatic acknowledgement is received in my mailbox.
5. Sir, as stated above, there is a major drawback in the policy of the company in respect of receiving a faulty part from the consumer. They do not directly receive the faulty part and hence no physical checking has made by them in the presence of the consumer. The faulty part reached to them through courier. Then they check it and decide whether there is any physical damage or not and this has been done in the absence of consumer. Now any physical damage or alteration can be happen due to mishandling by the consumer, by the courier company, by the executive of the company itself or may be intentionally done to void the warranty. Then why only the consumer is held responsible for any physical damage/alteration. In this case, as per the working states of the part before dispatching and after receiving, it is found that there was no physical alteration in the motherboard from the consumer side. So the company cannot deny repair/replace the faulty part.
The copy of the entire mail process is pasted below. Sir the company is denying to provide the warranty and thus I found that I have been cheated. For consumer rights and to get justification, I am presenting this case to you for the necessary and favorable action.
Sunday, April 19, 2009
Friday, April 3, 2009
my Power Mac G5 an intel processor
A bit of newbie question (my last mac was a G3 imac), does my power mac have an intel processor?SpecsModel Name: Power Mac G5Model Identifier: PowerMac7,3Processor Name: PowerPC G5 (3.0)Processor Speed: 2 GHzNumber Of CPUs: 2L2 Cache (per CPU): 512 KBMemory: 2 GBBus Speed: 1 GHzBoot ROM Version: 5.1.8f7Are these a good machine, I don't really know that much with newer Apple products but learning every day. Can anyone shed a bit more light on this model for me. Can I run Bootcamp for instance ? What type of games can I run on this model? Is it worth upgrading the video card etcAny information would be appreciatedThanksBen
Intel ships first dual-core Atom processor
Update on September 21 at 9:10 a.m. with pricing correction.
The single life for Atom is over--or at least one version. Intel said it has begun shipments of the first dual-core version of the Atom processor.
Tranquil PC T7-HSG Home Server uses the dual-core Atom 330(Credit: Tranquil PC)
Atom 330 pricing information and data sheets for customers will go live Monday, according to Intel.
The chipmaker indicated at the Intel Developer Forum in August that it would be shipping the dual-core chip this month.
The power-efficient processor will be targeted at Atom-based desktops called nettops. Currently, Intel offers the single-core Atom N230 processor for this category of small desktops.
At 8 watts, the chip has a higher power envelope than single-core Atom processors. The N230 is rated at 4 watts, while Atom processors for mobile devices such as the Eee PC and Acer Aspire have a thermal envelope of 2 watts.
Other specifications include a core clock speed of 1.6GHz, 1MB of level-2 cache, and support for DDR2 667MHz memory.
It's available as either a package with the Intel 945GC Express chipset (which includes built-in graphics) or as part of the Little Falls2 motherboard, Intel said.
"This is not for Netbooks," an Intel spokesperson cautioned.
But caveats aside, computer makers will do with the chip as they please. And a few may venture to put the chip into a netbook or notebook design. One of the more compelling reasons would be the 8W thermal envelope--far below the standard 35W power envelope of mainstream Intel-based notebooks.
Another reason is price. At $43 in 1,000-unit quantities, this makes it the least expensive dual-core Intel processor, along with the dual-core Celeron processor, also priced at $43.
Note: the price was originally stated as $40. Intel lists the price as of September 21, 2008 at $43.
Tranquil PC, a U.K.-based PC supplier, has already been taking pre-orders for a home server based on the Intel Atom 330.
Brooke Crothers is a former editor at large at CNET News.com, and has been an editor for the Asian weekly version of the Wall Street Journal. He writes for the CNET Blog Network, and is not a current employee of CNET. Contact him at mbcrothers@gmail.com. Disclosure.
The single life for Atom is over--or at least one version. Intel said it has begun shipments of the first dual-core version of the Atom processor.
Tranquil PC T7-HSG Home Server uses the dual-core Atom 330(Credit: Tranquil PC)
Atom 330 pricing information and data sheets for customers will go live Monday, according to Intel.
The chipmaker indicated at the Intel Developer Forum in August that it would be shipping the dual-core chip this month.
The power-efficient processor will be targeted at Atom-based desktops called nettops. Currently, Intel offers the single-core Atom N230 processor for this category of small desktops.
At 8 watts, the chip has a higher power envelope than single-core Atom processors. The N230 is rated at 4 watts, while Atom processors for mobile devices such as the Eee PC and Acer Aspire have a thermal envelope of 2 watts.
Other specifications include a core clock speed of 1.6GHz, 1MB of level-2 cache, and support for DDR2 667MHz memory.
It's available as either a package with the Intel 945GC Express chipset (which includes built-in graphics) or as part of the Little Falls2 motherboard, Intel said.
"This is not for Netbooks," an Intel spokesperson cautioned.
But caveats aside, computer makers will do with the chip as they please. And a few may venture to put the chip into a netbook or notebook design. One of the more compelling reasons would be the 8W thermal envelope--far below the standard 35W power envelope of mainstream Intel-based notebooks.
Another reason is price. At $43 in 1,000-unit quantities, this makes it the least expensive dual-core Intel processor, along with the dual-core Celeron processor, also priced at $43.
Note: the price was originally stated as $40. Intel lists the price as of September 21, 2008 at $43.
Tranquil PC, a U.K.-based PC supplier, has already been taking pre-orders for a home server based on the Intel Atom 330.
Brooke Crothers is a former editor at large at CNET News.com, and has been an editor for the Asian weekly version of the Wall Street Journal. He writes for the CNET Blog Network, and is not a current employee of CNET. Contact him at mbcrothers@gmail.com. Disclosure.
ntel DG41RQ Socket 775 Motherboard - G41 Express, ICH7 , mATX, PCI Express, HD Audio, Video, Gigabit lan , USB 2.0, SATA
Intel DG41RQ Socket 775 MotherboardCheck out this Intel DG41RQ motherboard supporting Intel Core 2 Quad and Intel Core 2 Duo processors. This board is built in the microATX form factor and offers premium features with the Intel G41 Express and ICH7 chipset. It supports 1333/1066/800MHz FSB, upto 8GB of DDR2-667/800MHz memory, Intel High Definition Audio, integrated gigabit LAN, and an available PCIex16 slot. The Intel DG41RQ motherboard offers you a stable computing experience. This stable and affordable Intel DG41RQ motherboard will work well for basic office and home programs, including internet multimedia, watching DVD movies, and burning your own discs.
Specifications
Form Factor:
µATX
Processor Interface:
Socket 775
Processors Supported:
Intel Celeron
Intel Core 2 Duo, Intel Core 2 Quad, Intel Pentium Dual Core, Intel Celeron Dual Core, (up to 95W TDP)
Front Side Bus:
800MHz
1066MHz
1333MHz
Northbridge:
Intel G41
Southbridge:
Intel ICH7
Number of Slots:
2
Number of Pins:
240-Pin
Maximum Memory Supported:
4GB - 32bit
8GB - 64bit
Memory Supported:
Dual Channel
667MHz DDR2
800MHz DDR2
Max. Memory Supported Per Slot:
4GB
Channels:
6 Channels
Audio Chipset:
Realtek ALC662
Video Chipset:
Intel GMA X4500
Supported Devices:
2
Hard Drive Types:
UDMA/33
UDMA/100
UDMA/66
USB Version:
2
USB Data Transfer Rates:
480Mbps
LAN Type:
10/100/1000Mbps Gigabit
Port Type:
RJ-45
LAN Chipset:
Realtek RTL8111D
PCI Slots:
2
PCI Express X16 Slots:
1 - PCIe x16
PS/2 Keyboard Connectors:
1
PS/2 Mouse Connectors:
1
USB Rear Panel Ports:
4
USB Onboard Headers:
2 - (expandable to 4 USB ports)
LAN Ports:
1
Audio Out Jacks:
1
Line In Jacks:
1
Microphone Jacks:
1
IDE Headers:
1
Serial ATA 3.0Gb/s Headers:
4
ATX Power Connectors:
1 24-Pin Connector
PC Power Connectors:
1 - 4 Pin
Fan Connectors:
1 x CPU
1 x Chassis
S/PDIF Connectors:
1
VGA Ports:
1
Length:
9.600 in. (24.5 cm)
Width:
8.600 in. (21.9 cm)
Detailed Features
A Closer Look
Specifications
Form Factor:
µATX
Processor Interface:
Socket 775
Processors Supported:
Intel Celeron
Intel Core 2 Duo, Intel Core 2 Quad, Intel Pentium Dual Core, Intel Celeron Dual Core, (up to 95W TDP)
Front Side Bus:
800MHz
1066MHz
1333MHz
Northbridge:
Intel G41
Southbridge:
Intel ICH7
Number of Slots:
2
Number of Pins:
240-Pin
Maximum Memory Supported:
4GB - 32bit
8GB - 64bit
Memory Supported:
Dual Channel
667MHz DDR2
800MHz DDR2
Max. Memory Supported Per Slot:
4GB
Channels:
6 Channels
Audio Chipset:
Realtek ALC662
Video Chipset:
Intel GMA X4500
Supported Devices:
2
Hard Drive Types:
UDMA/33
UDMA/100
UDMA/66
USB Version:
2
USB Data Transfer Rates:
480Mbps
LAN Type:
10/100/1000Mbps Gigabit
Port Type:
RJ-45
LAN Chipset:
Realtek RTL8111D
PCI Slots:
2
PCI Express X16 Slots:
1 - PCIe x16
PS/2 Keyboard Connectors:
1
PS/2 Mouse Connectors:
1
USB Rear Panel Ports:
4
USB Onboard Headers:
2 - (expandable to 4 USB ports)
LAN Ports:
1
Audio Out Jacks:
1
Line In Jacks:
1
Microphone Jacks:
1
IDE Headers:
1
Serial ATA 3.0Gb/s Headers:
4
ATX Power Connectors:
1 24-Pin Connector
PC Power Connectors:
1 - 4 Pin
Fan Connectors:
1 x CPU
1 x Chassis
S/PDIF Connectors:
1
VGA Ports:
1
Length:
9.600 in. (24.5 cm)
Width:
8.600 in. (21.9 cm)
Detailed Features
A Closer Look
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
ads
