{"video_id":"pMniLsz_s28","title":"Intel P67 SATA3 6Gbps Controller vs AMD 890FX Controller Linus Tech Tips","channel":"Linus Tech Tips","show":"Linus Tech Tips","published_at":"2011-05-08T14:53:29Z","duration_s":134,"segments":[{"start_s":0.16,"end_s":7.68,"text":"Now, this is something I've wanted to test since the Intel SSD 510 series","speaker":null,"is_sponsor":0},{"start_s":5.6,"end_s":12.44,"text":"drives came out, and I finally got a chance to do it. I replaced on my test","speaker":null,"is_sponsor":0},{"start_s":10.32,"end_s":18.32,"text":"bench my Intel P67A","speaker":null,"is_sponsor":0},{"start_s":15.0,"end_s":20.4,"text":"GD65, and I have put in a similar","speaker":null,"is_sponsor":0},{"start_s":18.32,"end_s":26.0,"text":"top-of-the-line AMD configuration with an 1100T, uh, the same RAM, same video","speaker":null,"is_sponsor":0},{"start_s":23.439,"end_s":31.76,"text":"card, and I replaced it with an 890 FX board from Gigabyte. This is actually","speaker":null,"is_sponsor":0},{"start_s":27.84,"end_s":34.16,"text":"the 890 FXA UD5. Now, what's interesting","speaker":null,"is_sponsor":0},{"start_s":31.76,"end_s":40.0,"text":"about 890 FX boards is that they all have SATA 36 GB per second. And unlike","speaker":null,"is_sponsor":0},{"start_s":37.04,"end_s":43.6,"text":"P67 boards, which have anywhere from 2 to four, with only two of them running","speaker":null,"is_sponsor":0},{"start_s":41.52,"end_s":48.48,"text":"off the Intel chipset, and the other two usually running off a third party","speaker":null,"is_sponsor":0},{"start_s":44.96,"end_s":51.52,"text":"chipset, all six of the SATA 3 6 GB per","speaker":null,"is_sponsor":0},{"start_s":48.48,"end_s":53.199,"text":"second ports on an AMD 890FX board are","speaker":null,"is_sponsor":0},{"start_s":51.52,"end_s":59.44,"text":"running off of the chipset. So you can run up to six Theta 3 6 GB per second","speaker":null,"is_sponsor":0},{"start_s":56.32,"end_s":62.16,"text":"drives. But what is the performance of","speaker":null,"is_sponsor":0},{"start_s":59.44,"end_s":68.24,"text":"the AMD chipset solution versus the Intel one? So I have attempted to at","speaker":null,"is_sponsor":0},{"start_s":65.68,"end_s":74.08,"text":"least give us some idea of what the answer would be. So here on the left you","speaker":null,"is_sponsor":0},{"start_s":71.119,"end_s":78.159,"text":"can see the AMD score and on the right you can see my saved Intel score with a","speaker":null,"is_sponsor":0},{"start_s":76.0,"end_s":82.0,"text":"single drive running at SATA 36 GB per second. So you can see for reads, the","speaker":null,"is_sponsor":0},{"start_s":80.159,"end_s":87.04,"text":"AMD controller doesn't quite hit the same sequential read","speaker":null,"is_sponsor":0},{"start_s":84.439,"end_s":92.64,"text":"speeds, whereas everything else is actually fairly similar. So for random","speaker":null,"is_sponsor":0},{"start_s":90.24,"end_s":97.119,"text":"performance, the AMD controller is on par. And for sequential reads, it falls","speaker":null,"is_sponsor":0},{"start_s":95.52,"end_s":102.24,"text":"behind a little bit and other than that, it's pretty much right there. So, as","speaker":null,"is_sponsor":0},{"start_s":100.079,"end_s":105.84,"text":"long as the CPU you choose is a good performer compared to whatever Intel","speaker":null,"is_sponsor":0},{"start_s":104.079,"end_s":110.56,"text":"platform would have been equivalent, it looks like if you're running a SATA 36","speaker":null,"is_sponsor":0},{"start_s":107.68,"end_s":115.439,"text":"GB per second drive such as this one, there's not going to be too much of a","speaker":null,"is_sponsor":0},{"start_s":112.84,"end_s":120.479,"text":"disadvantage other than just this one tiny thing uh to running an AMD","speaker":null,"is_sponsor":0},{"start_s":118.24,"end_s":124.24,"text":"motherboard based on 890 FX. So, thanks for checking out this video on Linus","speaker":null,"is_sponsor":0},{"start_s":121.759,"end_s":129.88,"text":"Tech Tips. Don't forget to subscribe for more unboxings, reviews, and other","speaker":null,"is_sponsor":0},{"start_s":126.0,"end_s":129.88,"text":"computer videos.","speaker":null,"is_sponsor":0}],"full_text":"Now, this is something I've wanted to test since the Intel SSD 510 series drives came out, and I finally got a chance to do it. I replaced on my test bench my Intel P67A GD65, and I have put in a similar top-of-the-line AMD configuration with an 1100T, uh, the same RAM, same video card, and I replaced it with an 890 FX board from Gigabyte. This is actually the 890 FXA UD5. Now, what's interesting about 890 FX boards is that they all have SATA 36 GB per second. And unlike P67 boards, which have anywhere from 2 to four, with only two of them running off the Intel chipset, and the other two usually running off a third party chipset, all six of the SATA 3 6 GB per second ports on an AMD 890FX board are running off of the chipset. So you can run up to six Theta 3 6 GB per second drives. But what is the performance of the AMD chipset solution versus the Intel one? So I have attempted to at least give us some idea of what the answer would be. So here on the left you can see the AMD score and on the right you can see my saved Intel score with a single drive running at SATA 36 GB per second. So you can see for reads, the AMD controller doesn't quite hit the same sequential read speeds, whereas everything else is actually fairly similar. So for random performance, the AMD controller is on par. And for sequential reads, it falls behind a little bit and other than that, it's pretty much right there. So, as long as the CPU you choose is a good performer compared to whatever Intel platform would have been equivalent, it looks like if you're running a SATA 36 GB per second drive such as this one, there's not going to be too much of a disadvantage other than just this one tiny thing uh to running an AMD motherboard based on 890 FX. So, thanks for checking out this video on Linus Tech Tips. Don't forget to subscribe for more unboxings, reviews, and other computer videos."}