just wanted to know, does anyone know if anyone made a board that would allow for dual socket 7's? i have a few old pentium processors, and wanted to see what they were capable of. Any ideas where i could find a board like that?
dual socket 7's???
- Thread starter Guest
- Start date
-
- Tags
- CPUs Motherboards Phenom
Nope. No such thing. Socket 7 processors were never made with SMP capabilities, and there were never any chipsets made for multiprocessing either. The closest you can come is dual Socket 8 which is Pentium Pro.
<font color=red>"I'm not gonna launch a $2 million missile at a $10 tent and hit a camel's butt." -Bush</font color=red>
<font color=red>"I'm not gonna launch a $2 million missile at a $10 tent and hit a camel's butt." -Bush</font color=red>
well, not quite!
read the <A HREF="http://ftp://download.intel.com/design/pentium/datashts/24199710.pdf" target="_new">Pentium Processor datasheet</A> that say the Pentium right from 75 MHz to 200 MHz supports dual processor SMP, and also the Pentium MMX from 166 to 233 MHz supports it.
as for motherboards, I dont know any of them, but i have seen some SBC dual pentiums, wonder why they dint make it into mainstream...
<font color=red>No system is fool-proof. Fools are Ingenious!</font color=red>
read the <A HREF="http://ftp://download.intel.com/design/pentium/datashts/24199710.pdf" target="_new">Pentium Processor datasheet</A> that say the Pentium right from 75 MHz to 200 MHz supports dual processor SMP, and also the Pentium MMX from 166 to 233 MHz supports it.
as for motherboards, I dont know any of them, but i have seen some SBC dual pentiums, wonder why they dint make it into mainstream...
<font color=red>No system is fool-proof. Fools are Ingenious!</font color=red>
- Dec 31, 2007
- 48,594
- 91
- 66,190
Forgot the make, believe it was an FX chipset (which of course means EDO SIMMS).
Here's a good question for you-I've seen Pentium, P-PRO, and PII systems use the FX, TX, HX, and LX chipsets. Proving compatability of PII chipsets with earlier Pentiums an dvice versa. So why were there no BX Super 7 motherboards?
Back to you Tom...
Here's a good question for you-I've seen Pentium, P-PRO, and PII systems use the FX, TX, HX, and LX chipsets. Proving compatability of PII chipsets with earlier Pentiums an dvice versa. So why were there no BX Super 7 motherboards?
Back to you Tom...
Compatibility among different generations of chipsets pertaining to processor support is logical, and i am amused at that being true.
If at all it is true this thing only suggests that the P6 core is backward compatible with the original P5xC core, all these processors have similar buses. So some manufacturers might have made boards in early times of P6 and P-II with these older chipsets just to reduce the cost, which might as well be the reason for there being no socket7 BX boards, let alone <i>any</i> 440 range (earlier 440FX/LX/EX/HX) of chipsets.
So theorotically, if you are able to make a socket7 or socket8 to slot1 slotket adapter you can run any Pentium or Pentium-Pro on a standard P-II class board.
That should also suggest that the earlier P-III might as well be compatible with super7.
We'll check it out!!!
girish
<font color=red>No system is fool-proof. Fools are Ingenious!</font color=red>
If at all it is true this thing only suggests that the P6 core is backward compatible with the original P5xC core, all these processors have similar buses. So some manufacturers might have made boards in early times of P6 and P-II with these older chipsets just to reduce the cost, which might as well be the reason for there being no socket7 BX boards, let alone <i>any</i> 440 range (earlier 440FX/LX/EX/HX) of chipsets.
So theorotically, if you are able to make a socket7 or socket8 to slot1 slotket adapter you can run any Pentium or Pentium-Pro on a standard P-II class board.
That should also suggest that the earlier P-III might as well be compatible with super7.
We'll check it out!!!
girish
<font color=red>No system is fool-proof. Fools are Ingenious!</font color=red>
- Dec 31, 2007
- 48,594
- 91
- 66,190
I believe the LX was actually designed for thr PII, and the HX for P-Pro, but have seen some Dell Pentium MMX computers with LX and HX chipsets.
A K6-2 would have been an awesome performer on a BX chipset, unless the BX doesn't support externall cache, but I find that a little hard to believe. If Super 7 would have implemented the BX, VIA would have never got the stronghold on the AMD market it now has.
Back to you Tom...
A K6-2 would have been an awesome performer on a BX chipset, unless the BX doesn't support externall cache, but I find that a little hard to believe. If Super 7 would have implemented the BX, VIA would have never got the stronghold on the AMD market it now has.
Back to you Tom...
It can't be possible, both the processors use different buses, Pentium uses 3.3V TTL, the PPro uses 3.3V GTL+ while the P6 uses AGTL+ bus running at 3.3V.
Older chipset cant be possibly made future-standards-compatible although the newer standards can be backward compatible with the old.
Most of the intel chipsets had similar suffixes, like LX, HX, FX etc so that might have confused people at the time when for example, 440FX had just appeared, people called 430FX as FX as we call 440BX simply BX. If intel makes a i850BX chipset for Pentium4, should we say that a P4 works on a BX boards? Its half truth half false!
PentiumPro worked with 440FX chipset that was the only common link between the PPro and PII although later PII chipsets could have worked with PPro, but never used.
Crash, the <A HREF="http://ftp://download.intel.com/design/pentium/datashts/24199710.pdf" target="_new">Pentium processor manuals</A> dont explicitly say it uses a GTL bus but just say it has a 3.3V TTL5V compatible outputs. The <A HREF="http://ftp://download.intel.com/design/chipsets/datashts/29055901.pdf" target="_new">430TX chipset</A> <A HREF="http://developer.intel.com/design/chipsets/mature/" target="_new">comparison sheets</A> say it <i>supports</i> GTL+ bus, but Pentium may not have used it.
Even the southbridges used by the chip<i>sets</i> across Pentium to PII are different. PIIX3 and PIIX4 although technically they are PCI devices so those can be interchanged.
what do you say?
girish
<font color=red>No system is fool-proof. Fools are Ingenious!</font color=red>
Older chipset cant be possibly made future-standards-compatible although the newer standards can be backward compatible with the old.
Most of the intel chipsets had similar suffixes, like LX, HX, FX etc so that might have confused people at the time when for example, 440FX had just appeared, people called 430FX as FX as we call 440BX simply BX. If intel makes a i850BX chipset for Pentium4, should we say that a P4 works on a BX boards? Its half truth half false!
PentiumPro worked with 440FX chipset that was the only common link between the PPro and PII although later PII chipsets could have worked with PPro, but never used.
Crash, the <A HREF="http://ftp://download.intel.com/design/pentium/datashts/24199710.pdf" target="_new">Pentium processor manuals</A> dont explicitly say it uses a GTL bus but just say it has a 3.3V TTL5V compatible outputs. The <A HREF="http://ftp://download.intel.com/design/chipsets/datashts/29055901.pdf" target="_new">430TX chipset</A> <A HREF="http://developer.intel.com/design/chipsets/mature/" target="_new">comparison sheets</A> say it <i>supports</i> GTL+ bus, but Pentium may not have used it.
Even the southbridges used by the chip<i>sets</i> across Pentium to PII are different. PIIX3 and PIIX4 although technically they are PCI devices so those can be interchanged.
what do you say?
girish
<font color=red>No system is fool-proof. Fools are Ingenious!</font color=red>
which LX are you talking about? 430LX (for socket5 processors) or 440LX (for P6 core processors)?
when the 430LX was being made, even the P6 was still in the labs. Pentium came way back in 1993 while PII came much later in 1997. it couldnt be possibly 430LX! that was long dead.
there were LX and HX chipsets in both 430 and 440 lines that might have been contributed to confusion.
PPro had been supported by 440FX and 440HX chipset, while the early socket5 Pentium was supported only by 430FX and 430LX chipset (which incidently was on the first motherboard manual I had ever read back in '94 it had just arrived in India and I actually built a Pentium) and later socket7 Pentiums were supported by 430TX, 430FX, 430VX, 430HX.
girish
<font color=red>No system is fool-proof. Fools are Ingenious!</font color=red>
when the 430LX was being made, even the P6 was still in the labs. Pentium came way back in 1993 while PII came much later in 1997. it couldnt be possibly 430LX! that was long dead.
there were LX and HX chipsets in both 430 and 440 lines that might have been contributed to confusion.
PPro had been supported by 440FX and 440HX chipset, while the early socket5 Pentium was supported only by 430FX and 430LX chipset (which incidently was on the first motherboard manual I had ever read back in '94 it had just arrived in India and I actually built a Pentium) and later socket7 Pentiums were supported by 430TX, 430FX, 430VX, 430HX.
girish
<font color=red>No system is fool-proof. Fools are Ingenious!</font color=red>
bum_jcrules
Distinguished
- May 12, 2001
- 2,186
- 0
- 19,780
I only know of an inmbeded Pentium pro dual board from Tyan. Check their site for something else but I don't know if you will find one to buy.
See this link for the board I told you about...
the Tahoe2
http://www.tyan.com/products/html/a_tahoe2atx.html
I am almost positive that there is a board out there.
Anyone know the name? Good Luck!
<b>Nice day for a mow. - My Blue Heaven</b> :lol:
See this link for the board I told you about...
the Tahoe2
http://www.tyan.com/products/html/a_tahoe2atx.html
I am almost positive that there is a board out there.
Anyone know the name? Good Luck!
<b>Nice day for a mow. - My Blue Heaven</b> :lol:
- Dec 31, 2007
- 48,594
- 91
- 66,190
Got any info on that? The HX was never avialable as a 440, only a 430HX. Your right about the others being available both ways. So the 430 HX was available for the Socket 7 and the Socket 8, that's a certainty. And I'm fairly certain I saw an HX on an early PII board. Additionally, Socket 8 supports PII processors, such as the PII overdrive made by Intel for it or the socket adapter Powerleap makes for installing Celeron chips.
Back to you Tom...
Back to you Tom...
Here is a
<A HREF="http://www.asus.com.tw/Products/Motherboard/Pentiumpro/P65up5-p6nd/p65up5-p6nd-spec.html" target="_new">Asus dual processor board</A> that takes all the three CPUs in dual config in form of a card. It clearly says that the card has the Northbridge!!! And that the PPro and PII use the same 440FX chipset!
That means the board itself is a substrate and you just need to plug in the Processor/Northbridge combo, whatever it is! The links to the cards are on that page itself.
check out <A HREF="http://www.asus.com.tw/Products/Motherboard/manual_sock8.html#p65up5" target="_new">this</A> manuals page for the board and card datasheets.
sorry abt that, there was no 440HX and PPro was also used with most 440 series chipsets, I suppose there was even a socket8 to slot1 adapter (i dont have any link but if i remember well it was from Supermicro)! But I dont think there could be any socket7 to slot1 adapter of any sort.
socket8 PPro and early slot1 PIIs share the same core so their buses are bound to be similar, but these processors use a different bus than the Pentium, electrically as well as logically. Its difficult there could be any translator chip (and if at all it could have existed, it would sure have been met the MTH fate, such stunts simply dont work), we havent heard of them.
Thus, socket8->slot1->socket370 are all interconvertible (in limited manner) but socket5/7 certainly is not on that list.
girish
<font color=red>No system is fool-proof. Fools are Ingenious!</font color=red>
<A HREF="http://www.asus.com.tw/Products/Motherboard/Pentiumpro/P65up5-p6nd/p65up5-p6nd-spec.html" target="_new">Asus dual processor board</A> that takes all the three CPUs in dual config in form of a card. It clearly says that the card has the Northbridge!!! And that the PPro and PII use the same 440FX chipset!
That means the board itself is a substrate and you just need to plug in the Processor/Northbridge combo, whatever it is! The links to the cards are on that page itself.
check out <A HREF="http://www.asus.com.tw/Products/Motherboard/manual_sock8.html#p65up5" target="_new">this</A> manuals page for the board and card datasheets.
sorry abt that, there was no 440HX and PPro was also used with most 440 series chipsets, I suppose there was even a socket8 to slot1 adapter (i dont have any link but if i remember well it was from Supermicro)! But I dont think there could be any socket7 to slot1 adapter of any sort.
socket8 PPro and early slot1 PIIs share the same core so their buses are bound to be similar, but these processors use a different bus than the Pentium, electrically as well as logically. Its difficult there could be any translator chip (and if at all it could have existed, it would sure have been met the MTH fate, such stunts simply dont work), we havent heard of them.
Thus, socket8->slot1->socket370 are all interconvertible (in limited manner) but socket5/7 certainly is not on that list.
girish
<font color=red>No system is fool-proof. Fools are Ingenious!</font color=red>
Oh now here is some surprise!
check this <A HREF="http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=440HX" target="_new">google search</A> and browse through some pages, you will see quite few boards based on the 440HX chipset! And more, some boards are socket7 while some boards are socket8!!!
and here are some quirks!
<A HREF="http://www.checkit-now.com/crasher/000814.html" target="_new">this page</A> says it has a <font color=green>Socket7 440HX Dual/AT TYAN TomcatIV</font color=green> but the actual <A HREF="http://www.tyan.com/products/html/a_tomcativd.html" target="_new">tyan page</A> says it is a <i>430HX</i> chipset! confusion?? or misinformation???
and now <A HREF="http://www.ts.nu/PriorTech/ppro_bare_board.html" target="_new">this vendor</A> has a socket8 PPro board based on the <font color=blue><i>Natoma</i> 440HX</font color=blue>!!? but on the same page they have some other model having a <font color=blue>440FX <i>Natoma</i></font color=blue> chipset! Is it a typing mistake or careless documentation?
<A HREF="http://www.fa.proside.co.jp/sbc/peak-530.html" target="_new">this page</A> also says it has a dual socket7 440HX board, but searching for <A HREF="http://isearch.intel.com/scripts-search/en/developer/index_en_developer.asp?q1=440HX&SearchCrit=ALL&category=Developer&mh=25&MimeType=HTML" target="_new">440HX on intel site</A> returned zero documents!!!
so is this 440HX a ghost or something? did intel really make any 440HX chipset? how do so many vendors have 440HX chipset?
have to look for the 440HX on intel embedded chipsets page, just when i get back from lunch.
girish
<font color=red>No system is fool-proof. Fools are Ingenious!</font color=red>
check this <A HREF="http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=440HX" target="_new">google search</A> and browse through some pages, you will see quite few boards based on the 440HX chipset! And more, some boards are socket7 while some boards are socket8!!!
and here are some quirks!
<A HREF="http://www.checkit-now.com/crasher/000814.html" target="_new">this page</A> says it has a <font color=green>Socket7 440HX Dual/AT TYAN TomcatIV</font color=green> but the actual <A HREF="http://www.tyan.com/products/html/a_tomcativd.html" target="_new">tyan page</A> says it is a <i>430HX</i> chipset! confusion?? or misinformation???
and now <A HREF="http://www.ts.nu/PriorTech/ppro_bare_board.html" target="_new">this vendor</A> has a socket8 PPro board based on the <font color=blue><i>Natoma</i> 440HX</font color=blue>!!? but on the same page they have some other model having a <font color=blue>440FX <i>Natoma</i></font color=blue> chipset! Is it a typing mistake or careless documentation?
<A HREF="http://www.fa.proside.co.jp/sbc/peak-530.html" target="_new">this page</A> also says it has a dual socket7 440HX board, but searching for <A HREF="http://isearch.intel.com/scripts-search/en/developer/index_en_developer.asp?q1=440HX&SearchCrit=ALL&category=Developer&mh=25&MimeType=HTML" target="_new">440HX on intel site</A> returned zero documents!!!
so is this 440HX a ghost or something? did intel really make any 440HX chipset? how do so many vendors have 440HX chipset?
have to look for the 440HX on intel embedded chipsets page, just when i get back from lunch.
girish
<font color=red>No system is fool-proof. Fools are Ingenious!</font color=red>
here is the breakthrough, that adds to the confusion!
this <A HREF="http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/archive/3622.html" target="_new">article</A> says about the 440HX <i>Carmel</i> chipset!!
Now we know that <b>Carmel</b> is the <b>i840</b> chipset, so intel might have renamed 440HX to i840 to be inline with the new i8xx series.
but how did this name 440HX stuck with some vendors? I dont at all think this 440HX they have is i840 since the specs are vastly different, the 440HX suppports only EDO and FPM RAM while the i840 supports only RDRAM! i840 also implements 64 bit PCI bus which was only on design table when 440HX was though of, and the i840 was supposed to support the SDRAM via a MRH (Memory repeater Hub) like the MTH which I guess dint make it. Or maybe did intel dropped the 440HX and kept the name <font color=blue>Carmel</font color=blue> for a new chipset, because..., they liked it?
then where did this 440HX come from?
see this <A HREF="http://" target="_new">intel roadmap</A> and intel still has stuck with i4x0 line with i460 for Itanium, i thought i860 was for Itanium (as the latest inf updates from intel adds i860 plus some 64 bit stuff) but its for Xeon4. And i460 stays and so does the i870 both with Itanium!
Rayston can you help to get the information straight from the horse's mouth (intel)???
girish
<font color=red>No system is fool-proof. Fools are Ingenious!</font color=red>
this <A HREF="http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/archive/3622.html" target="_new">article</A> says about the 440HX <i>Carmel</i> chipset!!
Now we know that <b>Carmel</b> is the <b>i840</b> chipset, so intel might have renamed 440HX to i840 to be inline with the new i8xx series.
but how did this name 440HX stuck with some vendors? I dont at all think this 440HX they have is i840 since the specs are vastly different, the 440HX suppports only EDO and FPM RAM while the i840 supports only RDRAM! i840 also implements 64 bit PCI bus which was only on design table when 440HX was though of, and the i840 was supposed to support the SDRAM via a MRH (Memory repeater Hub) like the MTH which I guess dint make it. Or maybe did intel dropped the 440HX and kept the name <font color=blue>Carmel</font color=blue> for a new chipset, because..., they liked it?
then where did this 440HX come from?
see this <A HREF="http://" target="_new">intel roadmap</A> and intel still has stuck with i4x0 line with i460 for Itanium, i thought i860 was for Itanium (as the latest inf updates from intel adds i860 plus some 64 bit stuff) but its for Xeon4. And i460 stays and so does the i870 both with Itanium!
Rayston can you help to get the information straight from the horse's mouth (intel)???
girish
<font color=red>No system is fool-proof. Fools are Ingenious!</font color=red>
Intel Pentium Motherboard Chipsets and their codenames (SMP=Symetric Multiprocessing):
430LX Mercury (No dual CPU)
430NX Neptune (Yes)
430FX Triton (No)
430MX Mobile Triton (N0)
430HX Triton II (Yes)
430VX Triton III (No)
430TX noname (No)
Pentium Pro Chipsets and their codenames (SMP):
450KX Orion Workstation (Yes)
450GX Orion Server (Yes 4 CPUs)
Pentium Pro and Pentium II Chipsets and their codenames (SMP):
440FX Natona (Yes)
Pentium II Chipsets and their codenames (SMP):
440LX noname (Yes)
440EX noname (No)
440BX noname (Yes)
430LX Mercury (No dual CPU)
430NX Neptune (Yes)
430FX Triton (No)
430MX Mobile Triton (N0)
430HX Triton II (Yes)
430VX Triton III (No)
430TX noname (No)
Pentium Pro Chipsets and their codenames (SMP):
450KX Orion Workstation (Yes)
450GX Orion Server (Yes 4 CPUs)
Pentium Pro and Pentium II Chipsets and their codenames (SMP):
440FX Natona (Yes)
Pentium II Chipsets and their codenames (SMP):
440LX noname (Yes)
440EX noname (No)
440BX noname (Yes)
- Dec 31, 2007
- 48,594
- 91
- 66,190
That TomcatIV board is the one I was speaking of in reference to the original post. computersurplusoutlet.com had it for $20 but ran out.
I have personally seen HX chipset motherboard for both the Pentium and P-Pro. I'm almost certain I also saw the HX on an NLX PII motherboard (it stuck in my head because of my surprise).
Back to you Tom...
I have personally seen HX chipset motherboard for both the Pentium and P-Pro. I'm almost certain I also saw the HX on an NLX PII motherboard (it stuck in my head because of my surprise).
Back to you Tom...
The page refering the tomcat4 board was wrong saying it had the 440HX chipset. many other pages have such discrepencies.
But the mystery is: what is this 440HX? if there was no 440HX then how do so many vendors have it?
Adding to confusion is its supposed codemane <font color=blue>Carmel</font color=blue> which we now know is the i840. then what happened to 440HX???
Are you sure you saw a HX (4<b>?</b>0HX) chipset on that NLX P-II board? A 430HX? or a 440HX? We have a got a habit of referring to the chipsets simply by their suffixes so if a new chipset with a new number comes with the same suffix, we tend to confuse between them.
But then, 440HX is supposed to be a socket7 chipset as to many sites suggest! And the one I refered to with a PPro 440HX board was wrong with name (Natoma)!! So 440HX if at all it exits works for a socket7 processor. Or the vendors confuse it with the 430HX.
well, we've got to solve this mystery.
girish
<font color=red>No system is fool-proof. Fools are Ingenious!</font color=red>
But the mystery is: what is this 440HX? if there was no 440HX then how do so many vendors have it?
Adding to confusion is its supposed codemane <font color=blue>Carmel</font color=blue> which we now know is the i840. then what happened to 440HX???
Are you sure you saw a HX (4<b>?</b>0HX) chipset on that NLX P-II board? A 430HX? or a 440HX? We have a got a habit of referring to the chipsets simply by their suffixes so if a new chipset with a new number comes with the same suffix, we tend to confuse between them.
But then, 440HX is supposed to be a socket7 chipset as to many sites suggest! And the one I refered to with a PPro 440HX board was wrong with name (Natoma)!! So 440HX if at all it exits works for a socket7 processor. Or the vendors confuse it with the 430HX.
well, we've got to solve this mystery.
girish
<font color=red>No system is fool-proof. Fools are Ingenious!</font color=red>
- Dec 31, 2007
- 48,594
- 91
- 66,190
I know as a FACT that I have seen the HX chipset on both Pentium and P-Pro motherboard and am resonably certain I saw it on an NLX PII mobo. And the 440 version was never available to the best of my knowledge.
As for the TomcatIV, it had the 430FX66 chipset.
Back to you Tom...
As for the TomcatIV, it had the 430FX66 chipset.
Back to you Tom...
Some more!
<A HREF="http://www.hc.keio.ac.jp/~fk992300/webmaster/7.htm" target="_new">This page</A> says 440HX was a SMP verision of 440FX for PPro!
<A HREF="http://www.sysopt.com/cgi-bin/chris3d.cgi" target="_new">This person</A> claims to have tested the P-II Klamath on a 440HX chipset based tyan P2 Turbo card that has a 1 MB cache! I cannot to the tyan site right now, will check out later.
There are some more links on this <A HREF="http://www.google.com/search?q=440HX" target="_new">google search</A> that refer to 440HX but they turn out to either 430HX or 440FX or 440BX.
And one more bad docs issue: <A HREF="http://www.ehitec.com/pricing/integration1.htm" target="_new">This page</A> says it has a socket7 Pentium SBC with 440HX chipset and the original <A HREF="http://www.trentonprocessors.com/support/jcm/f_5422_tech.html" target="_new">techspec page</A> clearly shows it as 430HX in the diagram!
Some questions stay about the 440HX:
<b>*</b> I guess the <i>440HX Carmel</i> was supposed to follow up the 440FX and add SMP support. Why wasnt it launched/promoted/used on larger scale?
<b>*</b> Did it go the i830 Almador way, dropped dead!
<b>*</b> All Socket7 boards that claim to have 440HX are wrong since it was only the vendors that say it and original manufacturer maintains the 430HX. maybe a marketing hype by the vendors, but why so many vendors?
girish
<font color=red>No system is fool-proof. Fools are Ingenious!</font color=red>
<A HREF="http://www.hc.keio.ac.jp/~fk992300/webmaster/7.htm" target="_new">This page</A> says 440HX was a SMP verision of 440FX for PPro!
<A HREF="http://www.sysopt.com/cgi-bin/chris3d.cgi" target="_new">This person</A> claims to have tested the P-II Klamath on a 440HX chipset based tyan P2 Turbo card that has a 1 MB cache! I cannot to the tyan site right now, will check out later.
There are some more links on this <A HREF="http://www.google.com/search?q=440HX" target="_new">google search</A> that refer to 440HX but they turn out to either 430HX or 440FX or 440BX.
And one more bad docs issue: <A HREF="http://www.ehitec.com/pricing/integration1.htm" target="_new">This page</A> says it has a socket7 Pentium SBC with 440HX chipset and the original <A HREF="http://www.trentonprocessors.com/support/jcm/f_5422_tech.html" target="_new">techspec page</A> clearly shows it as 430HX in the diagram!
Some questions stay about the 440HX:
<b>*</b> I guess the <i>440HX Carmel</i> was supposed to follow up the 440FX and add SMP support. Why wasnt it launched/promoted/used on larger scale?
<b>*</b> Did it go the i830 Almador way, dropped dead!
<b>*</b> All Socket7 boards that claim to have 440HX are wrong since it was only the vendors that say it and original manufacturer maintains the 430HX. maybe a marketing hype by the vendors, but why so many vendors?
girish
<font color=red>No system is fool-proof. Fools are Ingenious!</font color=red>
Not to offend you, but i am curious.
There was 430HX but no 440HX.
There are docs saying about 440HX chipset, but there is no official word from intel.
Many claims by a number of vendors for 440HX chipset are misleading as my investigations I stated in my previous posts say.
As for you seeing a <b>HX</b> chipset on PII mobo, still maintains the confusion about that <b>HX</b> ghost. If you could be certain it was a <b>i430</b>HX chipset then the issue is closed, it does support the PII! I will investgate for myself.
But if 440HX was never made, 430HX never supported the P6 core, at least nothings said about that, it still more intriguiging that there exists a <i>PII board with a HX chipset</i>!!!
BTW Tomcat4 has a 430HX chipset.
girish
<font color=red>No system is fool-proof. Fools are Ingenious!</font color=red>
There was 430HX but no 440HX.
There are docs saying about 440HX chipset, but there is no official word from intel.
Many claims by a number of vendors for 440HX chipset are misleading as my investigations I stated in my previous posts say.
As for you seeing a <b>HX</b> chipset on PII mobo, still maintains the confusion about that <b>HX</b> ghost. If you could be certain it was a <b>i430</b>HX chipset then the issue is closed, it does support the PII! I will investgate for myself.
But if 440HX was never made, 430HX never supported the P6 core, at least nothings said about that, it still more intriguiging that there exists a <i>PII board with a HX chipset</i>!!!
BTW Tomcat4 has a 430HX chipset.
girish
<font color=red>No system is fool-proof. Fools are Ingenious!</font color=red>
- Dec 31, 2007
- 48,594
- 91
- 66,190
No offense taken, as I already said, all evidence from Intel showed that they were indeed 430HX. I see no evidence of the existance of the 440HX.
I was almost certain that the vender said the TomcatIV they were selling had the FX chipset, but since I didn't get one I cannot verrify the information. I can verrify, as can many other people, that most HX chipsets were found on P-Pro systems. Which is all the evidence I can put forth to you that there was a 430 chipset that supported the P6 core. I know as a fact that one of the P-Pro HX motherboards I had was in a Dell, if you think you can get any information from them!
Back to you Tom...
I was almost certain that the vender said the TomcatIV they were selling had the FX chipset, but since I didn't get one I cannot verrify the information. I can verrify, as can many other people, that most HX chipsets were found on P-Pro systems. Which is all the evidence I can put forth to you that there was a 430 chipset that supported the P6 core. I know as a fact that one of the P-Pro HX motherboards I had was in a Dell, if you think you can get any information from them!
Back to you Tom...
well, do have any links? or some pics or docs pointing to it? do you know anybody who has such a board who could let you get its pic?
all the sites i have seen dont have 440HX (obviously) and have P6 and PII boards all having 440FX, or 450KX and 450NX. <i>Nobody</i> has any board for single P6 or PII based on a 430 chipset, let alone SMP board.
well, I must say all the evidence for PII on 430HX is circumstancial, unless we see and get to use a board with 430HX on it hosting a PII!
the 440HX may not have been existed at all, but there are strange docs about it (although claims about it, be it with a P5 or P6 are wrong) but there are some pointers that point to intel that they must have at some point started with it, but then let go. maybe the one you saw was one of the engineering samples of 440HX that never made to the market?
girish
<font color=red>No system is fool-proof. Fools are Ingenious!</font color=red>
all the sites i have seen dont have 440HX (obviously) and have P6 and PII boards all having 440FX, or 450KX and 450NX. <i>Nobody</i> has any board for single P6 or PII based on a 430 chipset, let alone SMP board.
well, I must say all the evidence for PII on 430HX is circumstancial, unless we see and get to use a board with 430HX on it hosting a PII!
the 440HX may not have been existed at all, but there are strange docs about it (although claims about it, be it with a P5 or P6 are wrong) but there are some pointers that point to intel that they must have at some point started with it, but then let go. maybe the one you saw was one of the engineering samples of 440HX that never made to the market?
girish
<font color=red>No system is fool-proof. Fools are Ingenious!</font color=red>
TRENDING THREADS
-
-
-
News US sanctions transform China into legacy chip production juggernaut — production jumped 40% in Q1 2024- Started by Admin
- Replies: 31
-
RTX 4070 vs RX 7900 GRE faceoff: Which mainstream graphics card is better?
- Started by Admin
- Replies: 70
-
Question I have been stuck between NVMe and SATA SSD. What should I do now?- Started by maniac2556
- Replies: 19
-
Question New pc build r9 7900x3d rtx 4080 super no post only ram rgb turns on- Started by Harvey Durward
- Replies: 5
-
Question 1TB HDD 80% Fragmented, Windows 10 Optimise Drives Program Doesn't Help
- Started by sdfbvcxbf
- Replies: 7
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram