Shuttle SN41G2 nForce2+IGP SFF Review (7)

	<![if lt IE 4]> <SCRIPT SRC="http://imgserv.adbutler.com/adserve/;ID=131075;size=468x60;setID=61435;type=js" LANGUAGE="JAVASCRIPT"> </SCRIPT> <NOSCRIPT> <a href="http://imgserv.adbutler.com/go2/;ID=131075;size=468x60;setID=61435"> <img src="http://imgserv.adbutler.com/adserve.ibs/;ID=131075;size=468x60;setID=61435;type=img" border="0" height="60" width="468"></a> </NOSCRIPT><![endif]>
中文版 \| News \| Archives \| Reviews \| Forum \| $ Deals \| Links \| History \| Contact \| Privacy

Shuttle SN41G2 nForce2 IGP SFF Review (7)
Overclocker 6 Jan 2002

Benchmarking

Quake 3 Demo 001

The test is done based on Q3 Demo 001 at 1024x768x32. The boards are run in CAS 2, 2-2-5 aggressive timings. The Shuttle box is running in two configurations :

1) with a GF4 Ti4200-8x card with detonator 30.10

2) With integrated on board GF4 MXThe

EPoX 8RDA+ is running on Dual Channel DDR mode with 2 x 256M Module + Chaintech GF4 MX440 64M Graphics card. The ABIT KD7 is running on single pc of Corsair 512M + Chaintech GF4 MX440 64M Graphics card w/ 30.10 detonator drivers. The ECS K7S7AG is running with on board "integrated" Xabre 200 graphics chip. Aperture size are all set to 128M

Two comparisons are made, first we take a look at the Shuttle SN41G2 running with integrated GF4 MX. As we can see, the performance is quite horrible, part of the reason is because it is using shared memory onboard.

In the second test, we install it with a MSI GF4 Ti4200/8x card and we can see that the Shuttle performs slightly faster than the EPoX 8RDA+ using the same drivers. We do not have a SIS 476 board, thus we are unable to compare. From the table, the KT400 KD7 doesn't seem to be performing well.

3Dmark2001 SE Build 330

In 3DMark2001SE benchmarks, the top 3 are all based on the MSI GF4 Ti4200-8x. From the results, we see almost a 200 points difference between the three boards. (1%). Looks like the nForce2 (IGP) performs pretty good when paired up with an external graphics card. The integrated GF4 MX is a bit way too slow but should be sufficient for your normal usage if you don't need lots of 3D performance.

Comanche 4 Demo

Again, we see that there is a difference in the results between the three boards. 48.05 vs 47.61. It seems that integrated board + external AGP card performs even better than the discrete chipset nForce2 SPP. In Comanche 4, the results shows a difference of around 0.9%. The integrated graphics GF4 MX is definitely a far cry from the performance level of the GF4 Ti4200/8x.

Next