Chaintech VNF4-Ultra: Features and Layout

 Specification  Chaintech VNF4-Ultra
CPU Interface Socket 939 Athlon 64
Chipset nForce4 Ultra (single chip)
BUS Speeds 200MHz to 400MHz (in 1MHz increments)
PCI/AGP Speeds Asynchronous (Fixed)
PCI Express 100MHz to 145MHz in 1MHz increments
Core Voltage Auto, 0.90V to 1.70V in 0.025V increments
DRAM Voltage Default, 2.7V, 2.8V, 2.9V
Chipset Voltage Default, 1.6V, 1.65V, 1.7V
Hyper Transport Ratios 1x to 5x in 1x increments
LDT Bus Transfer 16/16, 16/8, 8/16, 8/8
LDT Voltage Normal, +0.1V, +0.2V, +0.3V
CPU Ratios Auto, 4x to 25x in 1x increments
DRAM Speeds Auto, 100, 133, 166, 200
Memory Command Rate Auto, 1T, 2T
Memory Slots Four 184-pin DDR Dual-Channel Slots
Unbuffered Memory to 4GB Total
Expansion Slots 1 x16 PCIe Slots
2 x1 PCIe
3 PCI Slots
Onboard SATA 4-Drive SATA 2 by nF4
Onboard IDE Two Standard NVIDIA ATA133/100/66 (4 drives)
SATA/IDE RAID 4-Drive SATA 2 PLUS
4-Drive IDE (8 total)
Can be combined in RAID 0, 1
Onboard USB 2.0/IEEE-1394 10 USB 2.0 ports supported nF4
No Firewire
Onboard LAN Gigabit PCIe Ethernet by Vitesse VSC8201 PHY
Onboard Audio Realtek ALC850 8-Channel codec with 6 UAJ audio jacks, CD-in, front audio, and optical SPDIF
Other Features AMD Dual-Core (X2) Support with 5/18 Beta BIOS
BIOS Award 6/03/2005

The Chaintech was one of the motherboards that we had looked forward to testing. It is very inexpensive, and the last Chaintech that we tested, the Socket 754 VNF3-250, was an Editors Choice for value. Chaintech has repeated an outstanding selection of useful overclocking adjustments in the VNF4-Ultra BIOS. The features are also first rate for an Ultra board selling for $89 street price, with Firewire being the only missing feature of importance to some buyers. Even the excellent NVIDIA "any-drive" RAID for SATA 2 and IDE is fully supported, along with the standard NVIDIA chipset-based Firewall and LAN features. Chaintech has also implemented a really nice boot screen option. When selected in the BIOS, the boot screen shows post codes during boot so that you can see exactly what is going on and where problems might be.


Click image to enlarge.

While a little smaller than the other nF4 Ultra boards, Chaintech has compensated with a different layout that works very well in most cases. The 4 DIMM slots move to the top, with the Socket 939 moved towards the center of the board. This allows Chaintech to place almost all the storage connectors on the right edge of the board where they usually work best. SATA and IDE are well clear of the PCIe slot. The nF4 floppy connector is at the lower right of the board - not the best location, but much better than at the bottom of the board.

The only real compromise that Chaintech made with the smaller board was placing the 24-pin ATX and the 4-pin 12V between the CPU and rear panel connectors. No matter how you run the bulky 24-pin cable, it gets in the way of something - memory or CPU or IDE/SATA connections - and none of the routing options is really a great choice. Chaintech builds to a price point, and if this is the concession that had to be made for performance, we will find a way to live with it. That doesn't mean that we have to like it though.

At first, we thought that Chaintech had omitted an optical or coaxial SPDIF port, but looking closer, we found that the top left audio port (the blue connector) does double-duty as an optical SPDIF out port.

When we first received the Chaintech for evaluation, it was supplied with a passive heatsink for the single-chip nForce4 Ultra chipset. Chaintech sent an announcement that they had updated the design for active chipset cooling due to high temperatures with the nF34 chipset. Soon thereafter, we received an active cooling kit for the VNF4-Ultra that was a very easy installation. Chaintech tells us that current boards should be equipped with active cooling for the chipset.

Biostar NF4UL-A9: Overclocking and Stress Testing Chaintech VNF4-Ultra: Overclocking and Stress Testing
Comments Locked

75 Comments

View All Comments

  • Andreos - Thursday, July 7, 2005 - link

    Wesley - That helps, thanks for educating me on this stuff.
  • Wesley Fink - Thursday, July 7, 2005 - link

    #51 - We reviewed the K8NXP-SLI in the SLI roundup and the Ultra counterpart is the K8NXP-9. If you will look closely at the Gigabyte website pictures of the K8N Ultra-9 you will see it is the same board with a passive heatsink and fewer features. For information on how your Gigabyte performs at stock speeds (which is all that interests you) then please refer to the single video benchmarks for the K8NXP-SLI in the SLI roundup. We report all benchmarks at stock speeds so you and other readers can compare performance. Overclocking is covered as a separate feature. If you do not choose to overclock that is your business, but the information you are asking for is fully covered in our reviews. ALL the nForce4 Ultra boards perform almost the same at stock speeds, which should not really come as a surprise since the memory controller is on the CPU. If you were expecting the Gigabyte K8N Ultra-9 would perform better at stock speeds that anything else then you are badly misinformed. The Gigabyte boards do very well at stock speeds, but all the nF4 boards are close in performance at stock speeds.

    #53 - The BFG VNF4 Ultra is a rebadged (relabeled) Chaintech VNF4 motherboard. We did review the Chaintech VNF4 Ultra in this roundup.
  • VinnyS - Thursday, July 7, 2005 - link

    I would have liked to have seen the BFG NF4 Ultra board included in this round-up, it got high marks in a [H]ardOCP review. Any chance for an update to this review with this board included?
  • TheGlassman - Thursday, July 7, 2005 - link

    Well I was tired, You were using the 6-3-05 bios, should have quit while I was ahead. So now I have no idea what the problem was.
    At any rate the 6-3-05 bios is a dual core bios, so no flashing to a beta is needed for dual core.
  • Andreos - Thursday, July 7, 2005 - link

    I don't think you guys know your audience all that well. Not everybody is into overclocking to the hairy edge. Some of us wnat a fast and quiet board with dead-nuts solid reliability. For that reason, it is incomprehensible that the Gigabyte GA-K8N Ultra-9 was not included in this so-called "roundup". This board has no SLI counterpart, but it is of extreme interest to a lot of folks planning workstations based on X2 processors (and for which overclocking is of lower interest than reliable operation). Wake up dudes - the game is changing! Clock speed is no longer the Holy Grail. Other sites are savvy to this and will soon be eating your lunch!
  • Palek - Thursday, July 7, 2005 - link

    #49, no worries. I don't work for Anandtech, by the way. :)

    By my "far more than a day" remark I intended to say that I figured a review like this would take more like a week at a minimum - quite possibly even longer - to put together, so by the time the article was released some BIOSes would be outdated, since BIOS updates seem to pop up every other day these days. That is all.
  • TheGlassman - Wednesday, July 6, 2005 - link

    Sorry Palek, you didn't write the review, oops. My apologies to you and time for bed.
    Wesley, can you look into that?
    Thanks, and I'm sure glad the over a day remark wasn't yours.
  • TheGlassman - Wednesday, July 6, 2005 - link

    Thanks for your comments Palek, especially the latest and greatest comment. I checked the bios you used for the chaintech, it is a dual core only beta, ANY release bios including the 6-03-05 official dual core support (a month older than either of the winning (because they over clock TCCD better?) boards, and older than any dated bios) will perform much better in overclocking and probably every other test.
    If Chaintech shipped you a board with that bios it wasn't a wise move for a single core test. I think it would be fair to retest the chaintech vnf4 with a release bios, and if the results are different to note that.
    As far as the time taken to prepare this round up, much less time could have been used running bench mark after benchmark that shows apprx the same performance, and I would expect it take more than a day to write up such a comprehensive review. To take a few days to do testing that can benefit people who will base their buying decisons on your results, I think would be worth while.
    I am happy that I could pinpoint the problem with the Chaintech VnF4 Ultra results, as you may have guessed I am quite familliar with it. In the past, Anandtech has always explained why a beta bios was being used, I guess that it wasn't noted this time because you felt rushed.
    PS I know the DFI's are excellent boards, but their site lists a march date for their most recent bios, so maybe you should have used that one instead of their latest and greatest TCCD overclocking beta bios, and since you were using a beta, you should, again, have listed why.
    I'm sorry, saying it took more than a day is not good enough for the anandtech standards that have been so high for so long.
  • Wesley Fink - Wednesday, July 6, 2005 - link

    We have corrected the CPU and Memory voltage adjustments for the Abit AN8 Fatal1ty. This version only has voltage adjustments to 2.8V for memory, while the later Ultra and SLI versions do support memory voltages to 3.55V.
  • Palek - Wednesday, July 6, 2005 - link

    Wesley, that would be "proofreading" - one word! ;) Is that a job offer? :)

    #41, TheGlassman, you shouldn't have unreasonable expectations. I'm sure this review took far more than a day to put together, so of course some of the BIOSes used will not be the latest and the greatest. Adding three different types of RAM to the mix would require even more time. Then if you want to test them with different divider etc. settings, suddenly you have over a hundred combinations, a benchmarking nightmare. You have to draw the line somewhere. This was not an article focused on overclocking, but a comparison of 7 motherboards. I would have liked to see the new Abit boards included as well, but I guess that review will come soon enough, too.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now