VIA VB8001 - Nano - photos/benchmarks

Discuss the core components that make up the heart and soul of any good computer.

Moderators: Flying Fox, Thresher

VIA VB8001 - Nano - photos/benchmarks

Postposted on Wed Dec 24, 2008 7:36 pm

I'm not sure if this belongs in the Motherboard, CPU, or SFF forum. I'll start it off in Motherboard, and then see where it ends up.

I just received the new VIA motherboard which supposedly has the Nano 1.6 GHz proc on it. I'll be posting some pictures shortly, as well as total system specs once it's up and running. I haven't even fired the thing up yet, but I'd like to get some feedback from you guys:

What kinds of tests would you like to see run on this board?

I'm going to try reproducing the TechReport benchmark suite that was used for the last Nano tests on TR, but I'd also like to do a little more. I've picked up two discrete, fanless graphics cards - an HD4550 (Gigabyte), and a 9400GT (MSI) - and I'll be running some gaming tests too, and I'd like feedback on what folks would like to see.

If you want any particular thing photographed, let me know!

Edit:
Main system specs:
VIA VB8001 motherboard
- Integrated Audio, Video, and CPU (1.6 GHz Nano L2200)
4 GB of Crucial DDR2 667MHz RAM
40 GB WD Caviar HD (WD400JD)
80W PSU included in iStarUSA mITX case
Last edited by eitje on Thu Dec 25, 2008 10:03 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Your ideas intrigue me; I would like to purchase stock in your company.
eitje
Gerbil Elite
Gold subscriber
 
 
Posts: 661
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2003 11:28 am

Re: VIA VB8001 - Nano - photos/benchmarks

Postposted on Wed Dec 24, 2008 10:05 pm

Out of the box:
Image

You'll notice it has a single heatsink for the CPU & Northbridge, and that the fan is integrated into the heatsink.
Image

However, this means that if you're not happy with the way the fan sounds, you're probably stuck with doing some out-of-the-ordinary modifications on quieter fans to get them into place.

Removing the heatsink requires undoing some hex-nutted screws, as well as some plastic clippy things (not shown).
Image

Also, notice that the mini-PCI slot is on the bottom of the board, which will make this motherboard incompatible with some mITX cases.

Good news, though:
Image

It's definitely *branded* as a Nano!

Much like the Atom, this CPU is dwarfed by its chipset.
Image

Though it's likely that under the packaging, these two pieces of silicon are closer in size than currently meets the eye.

Finally, how long can you keep using the same Southbridge?
Image

If VIA's lucky, FOREVER.

Edit: Beware! Notice in the SB pic that the two USB headers are situated on the left side of the picture, closely surrounded by capacitors. Those connectors are actually smaller than standard (notice how closely packed the pins are compared to, for example, the Front Audio connector in the lower right corner of the picture), which means the cables that I have which cluster the female connectors all into a single black plastic block don't fit! That's really quite a pain, too, since there's only two USB ports on the back of the board.
Last edited by eitje on Sat Dec 27, 2008 6:54 pm, edited 2 times in total.
Your ideas intrigue me; I would like to purchase stock in your company.
eitje
Gerbil Elite
Gold subscriber
 
 
Posts: 661
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2003 11:28 am

Re: VIA VB8001 - Nano - photos/benchmarks

Postposted on Wed Dec 24, 2008 10:18 pm

Thanks for the post and pics. How much was all that. I plan on building a really cheap HTPC, so this looks good.
AMD Phenom II X4 840|Foxconn 780V|EVGA GTX660|4GB DDR2 800|Intel X-25M|NZXT 210|Corsair CX400|M-Audio BX8a Deluxe
GeForce6200
Gerbil Elite
 
Posts: 866
Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2006 5:08 pm

Re: VIA VB8001 - Nano - photos/benchmarks

Postposted on Wed Dec 24, 2008 10:36 pm

Thanks for sharing your new toy, keep the pictures and thoughts coming. Ditto GeForce's question and where abouts did you get this gem?

Edit: Could you take some pictures with the board next to a common object for a size comparison?
System: Antec P182, E3110, Abit IP35 Pro, Patriot DDR2-800 (2x2GB), eVGA 9600GT, WD 320GB HHD, Corsair 520HX, Vista 64
Fastfreak39
Gerbil Elite
 
Posts: 550
Joined: Tue Jul 25, 2006 7:55 pm
Location: central new york

Re: VIA VB8001 - Nano - photos/benchmarks

Postposted on Thu Dec 25, 2008 12:44 am

Board info (including where I bought it) from this front page article.

I'll add "HTPC" to my list of things. However, could you give me some ideas of the kinds of things you would like to use your HTPC to accomplish? Anything more than DVD playback, and DVR work from Windows Media Center?

Edit: And for all of those people that are bound to come storming in to tell Geforce6200 about how to build a cheap HTPC without using VIA parts, please remember that this thread is about the VB8001, not building cheap HTPCs. :)
Last edited by eitje on Thu Dec 25, 2008 12:57 am, edited 1 time in total.
Your ideas intrigue me; I would like to purchase stock in your company.
eitje
Gerbil Elite
Gold subscriber
 
 
Posts: 661
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2003 11:28 am

Re: VIA VB8001 - Nano - photos/benchmarks

Postposted on Thu Dec 25, 2008 12:55 am

Fastfreak39 wrote:Edit: Could you take some pictures with the board next to a common object for a size comparison?

It's a standard mITX form factor: 17 cm x 17 cm (or approximately 6.5" x 6.5").
Image

So, basically, only a little wider than a DVD case.
Your ideas intrigue me; I would like to purchase stock in your company.
eitje
Gerbil Elite
Gold subscriber
 
 
Posts: 661
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2003 11:28 am

Re: VIA VB8001 - Nano - photos/benchmarks

Postposted on Thu Dec 25, 2008 2:39 pm

Thank you very much for the picture. One thing I'd like to see is how well the Nano does HD playback with some sort of acceleration assistance, with the 4550 and 9500GT you mentioned.
System: Antec P182, E3110, Abit IP35 Pro, Patriot DDR2-800 (2x2GB), eVGA 9600GT, WD 320GB HHD, Corsair 520HX, Vista 64
Fastfreak39
Gerbil Elite
 
Posts: 550
Joined: Tue Jul 25, 2006 7:55 pm
Location: central new york

Re: VIA VB8001 - Nano - photos/benchmarks

Postposted on Thu Dec 25, 2008 9:01 pm

Merry Christmas to me! I got some time this evening to mess around with the VB8001. First, some basic stat shots...

The S3 Chrome drivers give us some system information:
Image

Notice that the onboard video is still using AGP, even though the system plainly supports PCI-E.

The oft-seen CPUZ screenshot.
Image

I didn't realize that the Nano was a 64-bit-capable processor. When I bought the board, it was with the understanding that it could not take more than 4 GB of DDR2 RAM. That is obviously a chipset limitation, then!

Here's the memory configuration - 4 GB of Crucial DDR667 RAM.
Image

Some might notice a discrepancy: while there's 4 GB of RAM installed, only 2 GB showed up in the S3 Chrome driver page. Similarly, that's how much shows up in a number of places around Windows. So, what's the deal? Well, my theory is that the Video Memory + AGP Aperture (256 MB + 512 MB, respectively) are having some kind of impact. I'll verify this when I move on to testing with the discrete graphics cards.

Finally, some idle temp & power measurements. I'll be using Speedfan for the temp screenshots, so here's our baseline:
Image

Power draw at idle (measured using a Kill-A-Watt): 35W!

PS - The tiny fan is just as noisy as I thought it would be. The heatsink is only 2" wide (around 5cm), so I'm thinking that I might be able to screw a replacement 50mm fan into the gaps between the aluminum fins. I'll only try that after everything else is done, though.
Your ideas intrigue me; I would like to purchase stock in your company.
eitje
Gerbil Elite
Gold subscriber
 
 
Posts: 661
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2003 11:28 am

Re: VIA VB8001 - Nano - photos/benchmarks

Postposted on Thu Dec 25, 2008 9:20 pm

Sweet ! I love stuff like this and thanks for sharing ! Congrats on the purchase too ! I'll be keeping an eye out in this thread for sure :D
ModernPrimitive
Gerbil Team Leader
 
Posts: 249
Joined: Thu Aug 03, 2006 7:12 am
Location: USA

Re: VIA VB8001 - Nano - photos/benchmarks

Postposted on Thu Dec 25, 2008 9:21 pm

First benchmark: 7-zip

Because I've seen a lot of people asking for it in the front page threads, I thought I'd start with 7-zip.
Image

It does a really good job of loading up the single core nano - the Task Manager chart was a flat 100% for the entire duration of the test. I also checked what running with TWO CPU threads would get me, and the end result was little change from running with a single thread (as one would have expected).

Comparing the Nano's results to what I've found on other sites (here and here), it looks like the Nano (for a low clocked, single core CPU) is holding its own against aging hardware. It is, of course, totally blown out of the water by those processors which can utilize multiple cores.

While working, we see that CPU temps get up to around 40C. During that time, there is no change in the loudness or RPMs of the HSF.
Image

And, as for power draw under load: 52W.

I'm not ready to say that we have a min/max yet (35W & 52W, respectively), but I'd call those a set of good starting figures.
Your ideas intrigue me; I would like to purchase stock in your company.
eitje
Gerbil Elite
Gold subscriber
 
 
Posts: 661
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2003 11:28 am

Re: VIA VB8001 - Nano - photos/benchmarks

Postposted on Thu Dec 25, 2008 9:58 pm

Second Benchmark: HD playback

Let me start off by saying that I'm an audiophile, not a videophile. As such, my HD playback tests are extremely basic. I found some free trailers online (hereand here). Some of them were in MP4 format, others in WMV format, and others still in Divx. Also, I do not have a BluRay drive nor an HD-DVD drive, so I have no way to validate HD playback against physical media.

For comparison's sake, I found videos that came in multiple formats and HD levels, so that they could be readily compared to one another. My methods: start Speedfan, enable Core 0 monitoring, kick off Task Manager, and then launch each video. Repeat as necessary.

WMV, Dolphins, 720p: (47W, average)
ImageImage

WMV, Dolphins, 1080p: (52W, average)
ImageImage

Divx, Pirates OTC: 2, 720p: (42W, average)
ImageImage

MP4, Pirates OTC: 2v, 720p: (47W, average)
ImageImage

MP4, Pirates OTC: 2, 1080p: (52W, average)
ImageImage

The Nano can ALMOST run 1080p video with the integrated video. While watching, the biggest issue with 1080p content wasn't frame skipping (though that does happen a little); the main problem with watching 1080p content on the VB8001 (using integrated video) is that the audio gets out of sync; WAY out of sync. I think the problem is actually that the video frames dragging behind, though, so maybe I would have prefered some frame skipping compared to that.

Another interesting observation is how quickly the Nano cools down once it's not under load - If you look at the Pirates 2 1080p usage + temp charts, you can actually see where a temperature dip corresponds to a usage dip. Similar occurances can be seen elsewhere; it's uncanny.

Finally, DIVX-HD really stands out in terms of CPU utilization & power consumption. When I downloaded the trailer, certainly it said it was H.264 content - but then I would have expected it to match closer with the stats that came from the other 720p videos. Not sure how I feel about those results... needless to say, I could not detect any variance between the quality of the videos.

All-told, the VB8001 seems to be able to handle 720p HD content without any additional hardware. I'll check back on this later, though, when I switch to the discrete graphics cards - maybe something will change for the better!

(Also, further supporting evidence for 52W being my system's upper limit)
Your ideas intrigue me; I would like to purchase stock in your company.
eitje
Gerbil Elite
Gold subscriber
 
 
Posts: 661
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2003 11:28 am

Re: VIA VB8001 - Nano - photos/benchmarks

Postposted on Thu Dec 25, 2008 10:37 pm

Great stuff, I really appreciate you taking your time to show us your findings. Keep it coming :D

Does anyone offer an aftermarket heatsink/fan for the Nano? I did a quick search and couldn't find anything.
System: Antec P182, E3110, Abit IP35 Pro, Patriot DDR2-800 (2x2GB), eVGA 9600GT, WD 320GB HHD, Corsair 520HX, Vista 64
Fastfreak39
Gerbil Elite
 
Posts: 550
Joined: Tue Jul 25, 2006 7:55 pm
Location: central new york

Re: VIA VB8001 - Nano - photos/benchmarks

Postposted on Fri Dec 26, 2008 10:50 am

Actually, your question should be "does anyone offer an aftermarket cooler for the VB8001?"
And since this thing is literally brand-spanking new, I think anything we find will be custom-built by enthusiasts (like me).

I have another free morning today, and so I think I'll get into the gaming tests with the onboard video!
All of the games will be demos from Steam, and all of them will have framerates recorded by Fraps.

Now, to work!
Your ideas intrigue me; I would like to purchase stock in your company.
eitje
Gerbil Elite
Gold subscriber
 
 
Posts: 661
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2003 11:28 am

Re: VIA VB8001 - Nano - photos/benchmarks

Postposted on Fri Dec 26, 2008 11:49 am

Actually, before the games, I did some SiSoft benchmarks.

My numbers, in some cases, were remarkably similar to the ones from the original Nano L2100 review.
Image

The VB8001 does a great job competing with ancient chipsets.

I did see a slight increase in the large-block portion of the cache test, but not enough to show up in the graphics.
Image

The benchmark was about 1.55 GB/s for 256 MB block sizes.

Finally, it looks like the Nano continues to shine in the crypto department.
Image

I note that the WorldBench 6 links in all of the recent articles are broken, so I'm skipping those tests. I don't like them, anyway!
Your ideas intrigue me; I would like to purchase stock in your company.
eitje
Gerbil Elite
Gold subscriber
 
 
Posts: 661
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2003 11:28 am

Re: VIA VB8001 - Nano - photos/benchmarks

Postposted on Fri Dec 26, 2008 2:15 pm

I'm going to save the gaming results until I've done them for all configurations. However, I'll go ahead and post other information as I go along.

I've installed the ATI card first.
Image

Upon switching off the onboard video, I've gotten back over 680 MB of RAM (ie - it was 2 GB in Windows before, now it's 2.68 GB). I'm not sure I completely understand that math, given the values that were supplied to shared memory & AGP aperture earlier.

The hardware will run @ 600/800 core & memory clocks (respectively), and has 512 MB DDR3 onboard. Also, it appears to be firing on all PCI-E 2.0 x16 cylinders!

Idle power for the VB8001 + HD4550: 47W, a difference of 12W. Not bad!

Edit: I don't notice an appreciable change in the playback of 1080p content using the HD4550 - it could be that Avivo isn't helping me in XP. Looks like I'll have to install Vista sooner or later. ugh!
Your ideas intrigue me; I would like to purchase stock in your company.
eitje
Gerbil Elite
Gold subscriber
 
 
Posts: 661
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2003 11:28 am

Re: VIA VB8001 - Nano - photos/benchmarks

Postposted on Fri Dec 26, 2008 9:50 pm

I found something interesting with my initial tests of the Nvidia card.

First, the driver info:
Image

I haven't seen any variance in the amount of memory available to me. That's good news.

The hardware will run @ 550/800 core/memory clocks (respectively), and has 512 MB DDR2 onboard. I wonder if we'll see any performance differences due to the "older" memory.

Idle power for the VB8001 + 9400GT: 50W, a difference of 15W. Slightly more than the ATI card, but still reasonable.

Now, for the interesting part...

When running the HD video tests, I noticed a slight difference; the audio from the Dolphins video was seeing some drops, but the video was playing back perfectly. Similarly, switching to the Pirates 2 trailer, I found that only a slight audio lag was occuring. Thus, I fired up Speedfan again, for a few more measurements.

Ambient temps were about 5C warmer this evening compared to last evening, which is too bad really. Hopefully this will still be a reasonable comparison to before.

WMV, Dolphins, 1080p: (69W, average)
ImageImage

Divx, Pirates OTC: 2, 720p: (58W, average)
ImageImage

MP4, Pirates OTC: 2, 1080p: (69W, average)
ImageImage

So, I'm not sure what to think about these results. I'm seeing marginally better performance out of the nVidia card using XP and doing HD playback. It still can't quite do 1080p, but maybe if I were using an 8600GT rather than a 9400GT....

Anyway, I'm done for the evening.

Let me just say, for the record, that playing the same games over and over again to get good measurements can get to be extremely boring. It almost makes me want to script something to do the mouse & keyboard inputs for me!
Your ideas intrigue me; I would like to purchase stock in your company.
eitje
Gerbil Elite
Gold subscriber
 
 
Posts: 661
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2003 11:28 am

Re: VIA VB8001 - Nano - photos/benchmarks

Postposted on Sat Dec 27, 2008 2:27 pm

eitje wrote:Actually, your question should be "does anyone offer an aftermarket cooler for the VB8001?"
And since this thing is literally brand-spanking new, I think anything we find will be custom-built by enthusiasts (like me).


Yeaaaah, I was in a hurry.

Any plans for some testing with Vista? Thanks again for being so thorough.
System: Antec P182, E3110, Abit IP35 Pro, Patriot DDR2-800 (2x2GB), eVGA 9600GT, WD 320GB HHD, Corsair 520HX, Vista 64
Fastfreak39
Gerbil Elite
 
Posts: 550
Joined: Tue Jul 25, 2006 7:55 pm
Location: central new york

Re: VIA VB8001 - Nano - photos/benchmarks

Postposted on Sat Dec 27, 2008 2:58 pm

Damn! Go, VIA, go!
Sagan: Phenom II X6 1055T + Xigmatek HDT-S1284 | 8 GB (2 x 4 GB) DDR3-1600 | 2 x 1 TB Hitachi HD31000 HDD | XFX Radeon HD 6850 + AC Accelero Twin Turbo Pro | ASUS Xonar DX | Silverstone Kublai KL04B
My HeatWare
The Great Graphics Card Warranty Thread
A_Pickle
Gerbil Elite
 
Posts: 719
Joined: Sun May 01, 2005 2:10 pm
Location: Fighting the mystery meat.

Re: VIA VB8001 - Nano - photos/benchmarks

Postposted on Sat Dec 27, 2008 3:52 pm

Fastfreak39 wrote:Any plans for some testing with Vista?

I'm about to kick off the creation of a Vista SP1 installer with the hotfixes Scott mentioned (second to last paragaph) rolled in.

All of the gaming benchmarks are done; I'll work on posting them in a few minutes. I think folks will be surprised!
Your ideas intrigue me; I would like to purchase stock in your company.
eitje
Gerbil Elite
Gold subscriber
 
 
Posts: 661
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2003 11:28 am

Re: VIA VB8001 - Nano - photos/benchmarks

Postposted on Sat Dec 27, 2008 6:12 pm

Third Benchmarks - Games

In all of the tests listed below, I was running Fraps. All of the games listed below are available as free demos via Steam, and so that's why I picked them. Some of them turned out to be very good indie games; Audiosurf (rhythm game using your own music), Project Aftermath (RTS made by some nice British gentlemen), and World of Goo (stupendous little puzzle game) were particularly enjoyable.

Whatever settings the demos start with automatically are the settings I used during testing, except for Audiosurf which I turned all the way up to really stress the systems. I tried to start the Fraps logging at the same spacetime in each iteration of the game. Most games had at least 3 captures in them, unless they were just too painful to bear.

Also note: There are some games that were unplayable with the Chrome9 due to framerates, and there were some games that simply would not load with the 9400GT. I didn't take the time to figure out the latter, and there was little I could do in most cases with the former.

I'm not Scott and Geoff, so don't expect a ton of fancy graphs from me. The winner of any particular test will have its name in bold. The numbers below are the average of the averages, rounded to the nearest tenth.

Max Power Draw (while playing Audiosurf):
Chrome9 - 52W
HD4550 - 71W
9400GT - 75W

Audiosurf:
Chrome9 - 9.3
HD4550 - 32.3
9400GT - 18.8

Bioshock:
Chrome9 - *unplayable*
HD4550 - 22.0
9400GT - 18.4

Darwinia:
Chrome9 - *unplayable*
HD4550 - 22.3
9400GT - *would not load*

Doom 3:
Chrome9 - 8.9
HD4550 - 40.5
9400GT - *would not load*

Half-Life 2:
Chrome9 - *unplayable*
HD4550 - 59.4
9400GT - 84.7

Lost Planet:
Chrome9 - *unplayable*
HD4550 - 19.4 (snow), 6.8 (cave)
9400GT - 18.1 (snow), 7.0 (cave)

Lumines:
Chrome9 - 28.6
HD4550 - 58.5
9400GT - 58.6

Project Aftermath:
Chrome9 - 7.6
HD4550 - 15.3
9400GT - 16.0

Portal:
Chrome9 - *unplayable*
HD4550 - 77.6
9400GT - 64.5

Psychonauts:
Chrome9 - 6.7
HD4550 - 29.9
9400GT - 61.0

Quake 3 Arena:
Chrome9 - 66.8
HD4550 - 66.5
9400GT - *would not load*

Railroads!:
Chrome9 - 2.7
HD4550 - 19.8
9400GT - 26.3

World of Goo
Chrome9 - 63.4
HD4550 - 75.0
9400GT - 75.0
Last edited by eitje on Sat Dec 27, 2008 6:46 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Your ideas intrigue me; I would like to purchase stock in your company.
eitje
Gerbil Elite
Gold subscriber
 
 
Posts: 661
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2003 11:28 am

Re: VIA VB8001 - Nano - photos/benchmarks

Postposted on Sat Dec 27, 2008 6:35 pm

I think it's easy to identify the games which had a FPS cap on them: Lumines, Quake 3, and World of Goo (though this was likely limited by forced vsync, since the monitor's refresh rate is 75 Hz). Another funny story is with Psychonauts, where it looks like its history as a Xbox Original title gives it a lot more *oomph* on the Nvidia card.

Games that fall into the "casual" market - Audiosurf, Lumines, World of Goo - did well on the Chrome9 integrated video. Older games, too, did fairly well - but you definitely need to reach back a number of years before you get to a place where the Chrome9 is really happy. Still, the Chrome9 did much better than I expected.

As for adding discrete graphics: wow! Who isn't impressed by those numbers? Of course, adding those video cards also means our system is consuming ~40% more at the wall. As long as you have a suitable power supply (80W or higher), that shouldn't be a problem.

We see significant improvements across the board, putting most of the games I tested at essentially playable framerates with default settings. One can see where maybe the VB8001 is still CPU bound, though: Lost Planet & Project Aftermath seemed to require a lot more from the board than it can give. Project Aftermath was still essentially playable, I must say, though Lost Planet was not. I imagine the VB8001 paired with a low-end, discrete video card would do admirably with most emulators, as well, though I didn't take the time to test any of them.

A few years ago, I showed that the then-current-gen EPIA boards could be coaxed into viable gaming platforms, though most at the time didn't understand why I would want to do such a thing. ;) I believe now, with the help of the Nano, VIA might have something that's really competitive in the USFF gaming market. I could see these boards going into all kinds of arcade machines (for example, the bartop video games that are so prevalent these days).

Anyway, I'll do some final tests with Vista & video playback tomorrow.

Edit: And with the ability to add PCI-E graphics (which apparently Intel is currently denying their partners), Nano stands above what one could get from anywhere else. I'd originally said this based on Scott's note in the first comparison between the Nano & the Atom. But then I remembered the Asus N10Jc, where there's a discrete graphics card available on an Atom platform. So, I'm retracting that statement, while still offering up another consideration: I wonder if something's changed @ Intel, or if they're only blocking people from creating Atom platforms with PCI-E *slots*.
Your ideas intrigue me; I would like to purchase stock in your company.
eitje
Gerbil Elite
Gold subscriber
 
 
Posts: 661
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2003 11:28 am

Re: VIA VB8001 - Nano - photos/benchmarks

Postposted on Sun Dec 28, 2008 7:56 pm

Quick update:
I used vlite to slipstream the hotfixes (there were two, one ~2 MB, another ~ 300KB) that Scott had said Microsoft recommended into a standard Vista x64 SP1 Home Premium install.

I still ended up with a 0x0000005d stop code as the installer launched. I'm wondering if that hotfix does what we think it does, or if maybe vlite doesn't do what we think it does.

In the meantime, I'll try the Vista SP2 Beta.

Update: SP2 Beta seems to be working. My question around hotfix vs vlite stands, however.
Your ideas intrigue me; I would like to purchase stock in your company.
eitje
Gerbil Elite
Gold subscriber
 
 
Posts: 661
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2003 11:28 am

Re: VIA VB8001 - Nano - photos/benchmarks

Postposted on Sun Dec 28, 2008 10:08 pm

With all appropriate drivers installed, Vista SP2 beta ranks the onboard video at a 2.0 on the experience-o-meter.
Image

It's interesting that the Chrome9 appears to end up getting 388 MB of video RAM, where I thought I was only allowing 128 MB.

Either way, after installing the 64-bit video drivers, the VB8001's onboard video is handling the Aero Glass interface in Vista x64 very well.

More to come!
Your ideas intrigue me; I would like to purchase stock in your company.
eitje
Gerbil Elite
Gold subscriber
 
 
Posts: 661
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2003 11:28 am

Re: VIA VB8001 - Nano - photos/benchmarks

Postposted on Sun Dec 28, 2008 10:44 pm

Here's the idle measurement before testing began, mostly just to prove that Vista was behaving itself. I had disabled the Indexer which - though no new items had been added since Vista was installed - was consuming about 10% on making sure that my Start Menu and User folder were fully indexed. Really.
Image

Also, idle power in Vista is 35W, the same as for Windows XP, further reinforcing that the WM doesn't really add much in terms of power consumption.

WMV, Dolphins, 720p:
Image

MP4, Pirates 2, 720p:
Image

Divx, Pirates 2, 720p:
Image

So, for the onboard video, it looks like we've taken a step back in terms of video acceleration. That's too bad.
Your ideas intrigue me; I would like to purchase stock in your company.
eitje
Gerbil Elite
Gold subscriber
 
 
Posts: 661
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2003 11:28 am

Re: VIA VB8001 - Nano - photos/benchmarks

Postposted on Sun Dec 28, 2008 11:24 pm

I'm plainly doing something wrong when it comes to HD acceleration. I'm seeing only marginal benefit when using the PCI-E graphics cards in Vista. Definitely still can't play 1080p movies with the ATI HD4550 in place.

Fastfreak (or anyone else), if you want me to look into this further, I'm going to need your help: find some articles on how to get HD accelerated video playback to actually work. Using WMP, MPC, and PowerDVD in Vista x64, I'm seeing basically no benefits whatsoever (though the numbers are showing approximately a 10% decrease in CPU utilization over time, this is still with 720p video).

WMV, Dolphins, 720p:
Image

MP4, Pirates 2, 720p:
Image

Divx, Pirates 2, 720p:
Image
Your ideas intrigue me; I would like to purchase stock in your company.
eitje
Gerbil Elite
Gold subscriber
 
 
Posts: 661
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2003 11:28 am

Re: VIA VB8001 - Nano - photos/benchmarks

Postposted on Sat Jan 10, 2009 6:17 pm

Got it. Installed Vista 32-bit, with the 9400GT, and things are looking a lot better.

Image

WMV, Dolphins, 720p:
Image

WMV, Dolphins, 1080p:
Image

I had some trouble with the MP4 playback in MPC; there was very little change there. And PowerDVD 8 simply wouldn't playback the video, though it did a great job of audio playback.

Anyway, I think I've finally answered the question:
With appropriate hardware assistance, the Nano CAN do 1080p playback.
Your ideas intrigue me; I would like to purchase stock in your company.
eitje
Gerbil Elite
Gold subscriber
 
 
Posts: 661
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2003 11:28 am

Re: VIA VB8001 - Nano - photos/benchmarks

Postposted on Sat Jan 10, 2009 7:05 pm

Quick question - does it have Gigabit LAN, or only 10/100? Apologies if I missed it in the text.
Mentawl
Gerbil XP
Silver subscriber
 
 
Posts: 449
Joined: Sun Dec 26, 2004 5:21 pm
Location: UK

Re: VIA VB8001 - Nano - photos/benchmarks

Postposted on Sun Jan 11, 2009 9:31 am

The VIA VB8001 has gigabit. You can take a look @ VIA's specs @ http://www.via.com.tw/en/products/mainb ... ard_id=711. There are only 4 minor issues I've has so far with this board, but otherwise I am VERY pleased.

1- the USB headers on the mobo use mini berg-blocks (jumpers) - standard USB header cables will not attach. I'm working on this so I can get more than the 2 ports on the back of the mobo
2- the PCIe riser card that VIA sells faces away from the motherboard. To mount a PCIe card in place parallel and over the motherboard you have to buy a reverse-mount PCIe riser (I've found this and getting it).
3- the BIOS only recognizes 3GB of the 4GB RAM I have installed
4- have not been able to get the Chrome Pro drivers to work in XOrg yet (haven't been trying too hard).

The board is awesome tho. I have it mounted in a mini-box M300 with a PicoPSU 90W w/ 4GB RAM and a 8GB SLC SSD. The system uses 28W at idle and 45W fully loaded. I have no complaints about the speed. Right now its setup as a PDC (via samba) and file server/web server using external eSATA disk.

-T
sawdustdood
Gerbil In Training
 
Posts: 1
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 7:17 pm

Re: VIA VB8001 - Nano - photos/benchmarks

Postposted on Sun Jan 11, 2009 10:39 am

sawdustdood wrote:3- the BIOS only recognizes 3GB of the 4GB RAM I have installed

I had the same issue initially. In fact, I had a lot of weird behavior from the system when it came to how much memory it would recognize. That and the USB headers really tick me off.

One thing I noticed early on in my tests was that the AGP Aperture could be set up to 1 GB. At one point, I lowered that to the minimum (64 MB?) and disabled the onboard video so that I could run the dedicated graphics. After that, when I re-enabled the onboard video (to test with Vista SP2 Beta), I could not raise the amount above 256 MB. During that time, the system would boot and recognize ~3.2 GB of RAM (the max specified by the manufacturer). A BIOS reset put the max back to 1 GB, though, and also took me back down to 3.0 GB recognized @ boot.

I suspect they may have a slightly buggy BIOS. If you download the latest from the internet (same as what ships with the board, 1.01), it comes with the internal changelog, as well as some other documentation. Long story short, it looks like the VB8001 is using a BIOS that was modified from a pre-existing board.

Anyway, welcome to TR, and thanks for dropping in!
Your ideas intrigue me; I would like to purchase stock in your company.
eitje
Gerbil Elite
Gold subscriber
 
 
Posts: 661
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2003 11:28 am

Re: VIA VB8001 - Nano - photos/benchmarks

Postposted on Sun Jan 11, 2009 3:02 pm

By way of comparison to those Vista Experience Index scores, a Celeron M 410 (1.46GHz single-core Yonah) scores a 3.2, while the GMA 950 IGP is a 2.4 for graphics and a 2.8 for gaming graphics. That's on my laptop.

This Nano board probably draws a lot less power, so I'd say it's probably going to be pretty good.
FuturePastNow
Gerbil Elite
 
Posts: 601
Joined: Mon Nov 24, 2008 11:28 am

Next

Return to Motherboards, Chipsets, & RAM

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests