Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.asus (More info?)

Assuming I get a slot-1 slocket, will a P2b (>1.10 & correct
regulator) actually run a Celeron at 1.1 or maybe 1.4ghz at 100fsb ?
That is, does it really work ? Is memory really critical or is
it not that crucial since you are only running 100fsb ? Do you end up
playing with the voltages and cooling to get stability ? Can I just
plug-n-play ? If I am looking for stability, would I be better off at
1.0ghz or lower ?

The price difference is meaningless in the CPU's, so stability is the
issue for me. I don't mind tweaking voltages as long as there is one
that will eventually work. FWIW, I'm upgrading several of these all at
once and I don't want to make a volume mistake.

Thanks,
Bob

Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.asus (More info?)

Yes and no.

You need a very expensive slocket to make a Tualitin-family CPU chip
(which is what you are talking about) work in this motherboard, but it
can be done, at least on some versions of the motherboard. However, in
my opinion, while it may be physically possible, it's not worth it, you
are better off upgrading to a new motherboard.


Bob wrote:

> Assuming I get a slot-1 slocket, will a P2b (>1.10 & correct
> regulator) actually run a Celeron at 1.1 or maybe 1.4ghz at 100fsb ?
> That is, does it really work ? Is memory really critical or is
> it not that crucial since you are only running 100fsb ? Do you end up
> playing with the voltages and cooling to get stability ? Can I just
> plug-n-play ? If I am looking for stability, would I be better off at
> 1.0ghz or lower ?
>
> The price difference is meaningless in the CPU's, so stability is the
> issue for me. I don't mind tweaking voltages as long as there is one
> that will eventually work. FWIW, I'm upgrading several of these all at
> once and I don't want to make a volume mistake.
>
> Thanks,
> Bob

Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.asus (More info?)

Bob schrieb:
>
> Assuming I get a slot-1 slocket, will a P2b (>1.10 & correct
> regulator) actually run a Celeron at 1.1 or maybe 1.4ghz at 100fsb ?

http://homepage.hispeed.ch/rscheid [...] e_faq.html
With the correct Tualatin compatible slot adapter, yes.

> The price difference is meaningless in the CPU's, so stability is the
> issue for me.

Since at least on the P2B-S the voltage regulator seems to be stressed
much more with a 1.4 GHz chip, I'd recommend the 1.2 GHz Celeron. You
might even be able to reduce the core voltage a bit.

Stephan
--
Meine Andere Seite: http://stephan.win31.de/
PC#6: i440BX, 2xCel300A, 512 MiB, 18+80 GB, R9k AGP 64 MiB, 110W
This is a SCSI-inside, Legacy-plus, TCPA-free computer
Reply to newsgroup only. | See home page for working e-mail address.

Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.asus (More info?)

Bob wrote:
> Assuming I get a slot-1 slocket, will a P2b (>1.10 & correct
> regulator) actually run a Celeron at 1.1 or maybe 1.4ghz at 100fsb ?
> That is, does it really work ? Is memory really critical or is
> it not that crucial since you are only running 100fsb ? Do you end up
> playing with the voltages and cooling to get stability ? Can I just
> plug-n-play ? If I am looking for stability, would I be better off at
> 1.0ghz or lower ?

I have upgraded numerous P2Bs to Tualatin Celeron and P3 processors.
Provided the board has the correct voltage regulator (as you noted), the
latest BIOS (1014beta3), and you use an Upgradeware Slot-T adapter, it's
a very stable plug'n'play upgrade. The Slot-T jumpers are set to 1.5v by
default, this can usually be reduced to 1.45v or even 1.4v without loss
of stability. The Intel retail heatsink and fan provides more than
adequate cooling.

Memory is the performance bottleneck on P2B systems with Tualatin
processors, so it's advantageous to maximise FSB speed. If you have
PC133 memory, a 1.0 or 1.1Ghz Tualatin overclocked to 133Mhz FSB will
perform much better than a 1.4Ghz on 100Mhz FSB - with no loss of
stability. Running the P2B at 133Mhz does overclock the AGP bus, but
most reasonably recent video cards will tolerate this without problems.

> The price difference is meaningless in the CPU's, so stability is the
> issue for me. I don't mind tweaking voltages as long as there is one
> that will eventually work. FWIW, I'm upgrading several of these all at
> once and I don't want to make a volume mistake.

I would choose processors based on the existing memory (assuming you
don't wan't to replace it). Systems with PC100 memory get a 1.4Ghz and
run at 100Mhz FSB. Systems with PC133 get a 1.0Ghz and run at 133Mhz
FSB. The 1.0Ghz Tualatin Celerons are virtually guaranteed to be stable
at 1.33Ghz and (at most) default voltage. 1.1Ghz processors are a fairly
safe bet too, but you might be unlucky and get one that isn't stable at
1.46Ghz.

HTH

P2B

Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.asus (More info?)

Barry Watzman wrote:

> Yes and no.
>
> You need a very expensive slocket to make a Tualitin-family CPU chip
> (which is what you are talking about) work in this motherboard, but it
> can be done, at least on some versions of the motherboard. However, in
> my opinion, while it may be physically possible, it's not worth it, you
> are better off upgrading to a new motherboard.

Very expensive slocket? Slot-T adapters are $20, and will work on any
P2B board with the newer voltage regulator mentioned by the OP.

> Bob wrote:
>
>> Assuming I get a slot-1 slocket, will a P2b (>1.10 & correct
>> regulator) actually run a Celeron at 1.1 or maybe 1.4ghz at 100fsb ?
>> That is, does it really work ? Is memory really critical or is it not
>> that crucial since you are only running 100fsb ? Do you end up
>> playing with the voltages and cooling to get stability ? Can I just
>> plug-n-play ? If I am looking for stability, would I be better off at
>> 1.0ghz or lower ?
>> The price difference is meaningless in the CPU's, so stability is the
>> issue for me. I don't mind tweaking voltages as long as there is one
>> that will eventually work. FWIW, I'm upgrading several of these all at
>> once and I don't want to make a volume mistake.
>> Thanks,
>> Bob
>
>

Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.asus (More info?)

On Sun, 04 Apr 2004 15:13:11 -0400, P2B <p2b@sympatico.ca> wrote:
>...
> The 1.0Ghz Tualatin Celerons are virtually guaranteed to be stable
>at 1.33Ghz and (at most) default voltage. 1.1Ghz processors are a fairly
>safe bet too, but you might be unlucky and get one that isn't stable at
>1.46Ghz.
>
>P2B

I've noticed Powerleap sells the 1.1Ghz tualatin celery in their $99
special. I guess they want to minimize your chances of getting
anything to compete with their 1.4Ghz model.

Or maybe they ran out of the 1Ghz models.

I think I'd just buy the old 1Ghz coppermine core celeron and forget
the adapter and tualatin. You lose some cache, but save some too

(duck and cover)

Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.asus (More info?)

joel@nospam.com schrieb:
>
> I think I'd just buy the old 1Ghz coppermine core celeron and forget
> the adapter and tualatin. You lose some cache, but save some too

Well, the differences between a CuMine Celeron and a Tualatin Celeron
(or a CuMine PIII, for that matter) aren't limited to the L2 cache
*size* alone:

* L2 cache size: 128K vs. 256K
* L2 cache associativity: 4-way vs. 8-way
* L2 cache latency: 11 cycles vs. 7 cycles

That's why a PIII-700 is about as fast as a Celeron 850; a Celeron 1.1
should be about as fast as a PIII-900 then. A Tualatin Celeron, however,
is pretty much exactly as fast as a Coppermine PIII at the same clock
speed, which is not too shabby.

Stephan
--
Meine Andere Seite: http://stephan.win31.de/
PC#6: i440BX, 2xCel300A, 512 MiB, 18+80 GB, R9k AGP 64 MiB, 110W
This is a SCSI-inside, Legacy-plus, TCPA-free computer
Reply to newsgroup only. | See home page for working e-mail address.

Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.asus (More info?)

Stephan Grossklass wrote:

> joel@nospam.com schrieb:
>
>>I think I'd just buy the old 1Ghz coppermine core celeron and forget
>>the adapter and tualatin. You lose some cache, but save some too
>
>
> Well, the differences between a CuMine Celeron and a Tualatin Celeron
> (or a CuMine PIII, for that matter) aren't limited to the L2 cache
> *size* alone:
>
> * L2 cache size: 128K vs. 256K
> * L2 cache associativity: 4-way vs. 8-way
> * L2 cache latency: 11 cycles vs. 7 cycles
>
> That's why a PIII-700 is about as fast as a Celeron 850; a Celeron 1.1
> should be about as fast as a PIII-900 then. A Tualatin Celeron, however,
> is pretty much exactly as fast as a Coppermine PIII at the same clock
> speed, which is not too shabby.

Exactly - and worth noting a Coppermine core will rarely clock much over
1.2Ghz, while a Tualatin core rarely fails to make 1.5Ghz.

Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.asus (More info?)

On Sun, 04 Apr 2004 15:13:11 -0400, P2B <p2b@sympatico.ca> wrote:

>Memory is the performance bottleneck on P2B systems with Tualatin
>processors, so it's advantageous to maximise FSB speed. If you have
>PC133 memory, a 1.0 or 1.1Ghz Tualatin overclocked to 133Mhz FSB will
>perform much better than a 1.4Ghz on 100Mhz FSB - with no loss of
>stability. Running the P2B at 133Mhz does overclock the AGP bus, but
>most reasonably recent video cards will tolerate this without problems.


Will setting the AGP jumper to 2/3 solve this potential problem
if it occurs ? Or will that slow the graphics and negatively impact
performance ? These boards are running ATI 3d Rage Pro 2x cards.
I'd prefer not to upgrade them since whatever I buy will no doubt
also be out-of-date when I replace these mobo's. This is just to
tie over these (several) systems until I can spring to rebuild
them from the ground up.

Thanks,

Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.asus (More info?)

Bob wrote:

> On Sun, 04 Apr 2004 15:13:11 -0400, P2B <p2b@sympatico.ca> wrote:
>
>
>>Memory is the performance bottleneck on P2B systems with Tualatin
>>processors, so it's advantageous to maximise FSB speed. If you have
>>PC133 memory, a 1.0 or 1.1Ghz Tualatin overclocked to 133Mhz FSB will
>>perform much better than a 1.4Ghz on 100Mhz FSB - with no loss of
>>stability. Running the P2B at 133Mhz does overclock the AGP bus, but
>>most reasonably recent video cards will tolerate this without problems.
>
>
>
> Will setting the AGP jumper to 2/3 solve this potential problem
> if it occurs ? Or will that slow the graphics and negatively impact
> performance ? These boards are running ATI 3d Rage Pro 2x cards.
> I'd prefer not to upgrade them since whatever I buy will no doubt
> also be out-of-date when I replace these mobo's. This is just to
> tie over these (several) systems until I can spring to rebuild
> them from the ground up.
>
> Thanks,

The AGP jumper should be set to 2/3 when FSB is 100Mhz or higher, but
2/3 of 133 is still almost 89Mhz. Unfortunately the BX chipset does not
support a 1/2 divider, which is 'correct' for 133Mhz FSB.

I've had mixed results with ATI 3d Rage Pro video cards at 89Mhz - most
are OK, some misbehave. IME nVidia-based cards never have a problem, but
other chipset brands are less predictable.

P2B

Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.asus (More info?)

On Tue, 06 Apr 2004 21:53:35 -0400, P2B <p2b@sympatico.ca> wrote:

>The AGP jumper should be set to 2/3 when FSB is 100Mhz or higher, but
>2/3 of 133 is still almost 89Mhz. Unfortunately the BX chipset does not
>support a 1/2 divider, which is 'correct' for 133Mhz FSB.

>I've had mixed results with ATI 3d Rage Pro video cards at 89Mhz - most
>are OK, some misbehave. IME nVidia-based cards never have a problem, but
>other chipset brands are less predictable.


Oh... I didn't know that. I thought you only had to set it for speeds
over 100mhz. I realize now that it should be 66. I've got it running
at 100mhz with my ATI Rage Pro... so I guess it will do 89 OK. But, I
don't know if all my ATI cards will based on what you said. I'll have
to swap a few cards and see how they do.

What's the usual symptom of overruning the video ?

Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.asus (More info?)

On Mon, 05 Apr 2004 20:04:17 +0200, Stephan Grossklass
<sgrossklass@yahoo.de> wrote:

>joel@nospam.com schrieb:
>>
>> I think I'd just buy the old 1Ghz coppermine core celeron and forget
>> the adapter and tualatin. You lose some cache, but save some too
>
>Well, the differences between a CuMine Celeron and a Tualatin Celeron
>(or a CuMine PIII, for that matter) aren't limited to the L2 cache
>*size* alone:
>
>* L2 cache size: 128K vs. 256K
>* L2 cache associativity: 4-way vs. 8-way
>* L2 cache latency: 11 cycles vs. 7 cycles
>
>That's why a PIII-700 is about as fast as a Celeron 850; a Celeron 1.1
>should be about as fast as a PIII-900 then. A Tualatin Celeron, however,
>is pretty much exactly as fast as a Coppermine PIII at the same clock
>speed, which is not too shabby.
>
>Stephan


I recall that cache associativity stuff, they really hacked the thing
in half. I was wondering if having 512M ram memory and 8M hard disk
cache these days makes up for some of that latency.

Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.asus (More info?)

joel@nospam.com wrote:
> On Mon, 05 Apr 2004 20:04:17 +0200, Stephan Grossklass
> <sgrossklass@yahoo.de> wrote:
>
>
>>joel@nospam.com schrieb:
>>
>>>I think I'd just buy the old 1Ghz coppermine core celeron and forget
>>>the adapter and tualatin. You lose some cache, but save some too
>>
>>Well, the differences between a CuMine Celeron and a Tualatin Celeron
>>(or a CuMine PIII, for that matter) aren't limited to the L2 cache
>>*size* alone:
>>
>>* L2 cache size: 128K vs. 256K
>>* L2 cache associativity: 4-way vs. 8-way
>>* L2 cache latency: 11 cycles vs. 7 cycles
>>
>>That's why a PIII-700 is about as fast as a Celeron 850; a Celeron 1.1
>>should be about as fast as a PIII-900 then. A Tualatin Celeron, however,
>>is pretty much exactly as fast as a Coppermine PIII at the same clock
>>speed, which is not too shabby.
>>
>>Stephan
>
>
>
> I recall that cache associativity stuff, they really hacked the thing
> in half. I was wondering if having 512M ram memory and 8M hard disk
> cache these days makes up for some of that latency.

No. Cache reduces access times for ram, it doesn't matter how much ram
you have (having some uber-fast ram comparable with L2 cache
latency/bandwidth would help, but that just doesn't exist - L2 cache is
much faster, and in fact the performance difference between ram and
cache on a Piii platform will only get bigger with higher cpu frequencies).
And the hd cache only speeds up i/o access (which is orders of
magnitudes slower than memory access), nothing else.

Roland