Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

P4 or P3 dual proc. as webserver

Last response: in CPUs
Share
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
January 19, 2002 2:51:23 AM

Hello,

I wonder if it is better (more economical) to buy a P4 single processor or a P3 dual processor system for use as a Windows 2000 webserver. Maybe somebody can post some comments, links to articles etc. I know that the multimedia features of P4 are not useful for server application. Does anybody know how a 2GHz p4 would compare to a 2 x p3 1GHz system. Thx for your feedback.

More about : dual proc webserver

January 19, 2002 7:12:19 AM

If cost effectivness is what you are after, a single athlon xp or a dual athlon mp system would be a much better choice than any p4 system(or dual p3).


Is there a reason amd is not an option for you?

"The Cash Left In My Pocket,The BEST Benchmark"
No Overclock+stock hsf=GOOD!
January 19, 2002 7:15:35 AM

Quote:
Is there a reason amd is not an option for you?

yes, he said he wants to run a server. That requires a reliable platform.

<i>The devil's advocate</i>
Related resources
Can't find your answer ? Ask !
January 19, 2002 8:13:19 AM

If you have or can get multi-threaded apps, then a dual-P3 solution may be best. And don't get the Coppermine versions, go for the Tualatin version (1.13GHz and faster) as they are faster and cooler running.

But if you're running single-threaded apps, a P4 is the best bet.
January 19, 2002 8:24:35 AM

That's not at all a good reason. You can say "AMD platform is unstable" all you want, but that doesn't make it a fact. When most professional reviewers disagree with you, that tends to make your line BS. :tongue:

<i>If a server crashes in a server farm and no one pings it, does it still cost four figures to fix?
January 19, 2002 8:51:59 AM

I was gonna reply to him, but hes not worth it.


To the poster of this thread, amd platforms when properly set up are as stable as intel systems.



"The Cash Left In My Pocket,The BEST Benchmark"
No Overclock+stock hsf=GOOD!
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
January 19, 2002 11:40:09 AM

hello,

actually I'm considering AMD Athlon XP as my first choice, I was not aware that AMD builds very fast processors too. I haven't been up to date with my hardware knowledge.
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
January 19, 2002 12:54:43 PM

AnandTech did some tests a while ago, comparing dual Xeons (both P3 and P4) against dual Athlon MPs. The outcome was pretty clear: he installed Athlons servers for his own forum database servers (I know, quite different from serving webpages, but still). However, if rackspace is an issue, Id go for a dual P3 tualatin setup. 1U Athlon servers can be found (or made), but its not easy. Tualatins lower power consumption and the fact that are so many 1 and 2u rackservers available would make it an obvious choice. If you dont need a rackserver, I'd build my own dual Athlon MP server. Its faster, cheaper, and just as stable. In a big case, heat shouldnt be a big problem either (not more than for a comparable P4 setup anyway).

= The views stated herein are my personal views, and not necessarily the views of my wife. =
January 19, 2002 8:49:04 PM

it is a fact, tom even said it on his site that p4 systems were more stable. I will take his word over yours.

<i>The devil's advocate</i>
January 20, 2002 2:43:47 AM

Will you take his word over the word of Ace's Hardware, LinuxHardware.org, AnandTech, etc? Every other reviewer besides Tom seems to be perfectly capable of getting an Athlon to the point of rock-solid stability. You don't have to take my word; just take the word of three or more against Tom.

And we'd sure as hell take anyone's word over <A HREF="http://forumz.tomshardware.com/modules.php?name=Forums&..." target="_new">yours</A>. :tongue:

<i>If a server crashes in a server farm and no one pings it, does it still cost four figures to fix?
January 20, 2002 5:25:17 AM

lol, fine don't say I didn't warn you

<i>The devil's advocate</i>
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
January 20, 2002 7:16:21 AM

Our server at work was being upgraded the other day, and I asked the guy what he thought of Athlon's. He said they run too hot, and they don't touch them. He said some of the software they use refuses to run on AMD, like Ghost.

If it's a case of *making* an AMD system stable, or just buying a dual PIII tualatin system which is stable by *default*, I know what I'd go for!
January 20, 2002 7:34:50 AM

let me tell u that that is absolutely not true.
athlons do run hot, but even its stock HSF is capable of keeping it down to a very , very normal temperature of 43 degrees (just assembled an athlon xp 1800+ system yesterday!).
as for the story about some apps not running on AMD , well HAHA. that is the silliest story i have ever heard to date (well not THE silliest :)  ). Both CPUs handle the same API standard , or else we would have "windows for AMD" and "windows for intel" .

We always tend to bash what we do not know, and that tech engineer (if you call him an engineer) who told you this obviously has never been aroung AMD systems, maybe just heard rumors.
January 20, 2002 7:40:53 AM

Well, just to be fair, if his application required SSE and his experience was with Athlon processors... or if his application required SSE2 and his experience was with Athlon or Athlon XP processors... (the latter being less likely), then it actually would not work on the AMD processor in question.

In fact, recently Everquest had a problem where the game would not run at all on AMD processors. An exception was generated, throwing the user back to the desktop. The game was patched up after a week or two to fix it with a software workaround. They (Sony) reported it to be a floating point problem in the K6-2 and early Athlon processors. I have no specifics on it.

Things that make you go hmm...

-Raystonn


= The views stated herein are my personal views, and not necessarily the views of my employer. =
January 20, 2002 7:41:20 AM

PS : i use ghost on my duron.
January 20, 2002 7:53:18 AM

Quote:
He said they run too hot, and they don't touch them. He said some of the software they use refuses to run on AMD, like Ghost.

1) P4's generally run hotter than Athlons. P3's don't, however, so you have a worthy point there.

2) Ghost runs just fine on Athlons. I used to use it myself when I was actually using my Windows install, and I never had to do anything special to make it work. Same goes for just about every piece of software I've ever installed.

Quote:
If it's a case of *making* an AMD system stable, or just buying a dual PIII tualatin system which is stable by *default*, I know what I'd go for!

If you think Intel systems always come "stable by default," <b>they don't.</b> I've had to play video driver hopskotch with my dual-proc 440BX system, and I've had to be careful never to pair my dual PPRO+430FX system with any decent-size Western Digital IDE drive. The only system I've ever had that <i>doesn't</i> give me headaches is my ancient AMD 5x86-133.

<i>If a server crashes in a server farm and no one pings it, does it still cost four figures to fix?
January 20, 2002 8:07:27 AM

Or you could consider the FDIV bug in early Pentiums, in which case Intel was forced to do a recall.

Or the ill-fated P3 1.13GHz Coppermine. Ten to one Intel was quietly hoping that no one would notice the "factory overclock."

Things like that make you say a hell of a lot more than "hmm..." And I have not once heard of AMD letting such a colossal manufacturing error slip through the cracks.

<i>If a server crashes in a server farm and no one pings it, does it still cost four figures to fix?
January 20, 2002 9:19:12 AM

at least intel has the sense to recall deffective products, and not let users find out about non-working features such as amd's 'thermal diode'

<i>The devil's advocate</i>
January 20, 2002 10:00:58 AM

AMD's <i>diode</i> works within spec. AMD specified that thermal protection was a two-part solution, part motherboard and part CPU. Since the CPU operates within spec, there's no reason to recall it. Since most motherboards can protect a properly installed Athlon just fine without even using the thermal diode, it hardly even matters.

Fact is, AMD's probably never screwed up as badly as Intel did with the 1.13GHz Coppermine. :tongue:

<i>If a server crashes in a server farm and no one pings it, does it still cost four figures to fix?
January 20, 2002 10:55:26 AM

The guy you talked to dosent know what hes talking about, there is no software which WONT run on amd.


As for making amd stable, all you have to do to make amd run stable is use some brains when choosing a mobo, and avoid via if possible.

Contrary to popular belief, it is no harder to get a stable amd system than an intel system provided you purchase the proper motherboard.

"The Cash Left In My Pocket,The BEST Benchmark"
No Overclock+stock hsf=GOOD!
January 20, 2002 10:58:10 AM

Intel_inside, that attack shows the depths of your ignorance. Perhaps you wouldnt be so dissapointed in amds features if you stopped imagining they offer something different from what they actually are.

"The Cash Left In My Pocket,The BEST Benchmark"
No Overclock+stock hsf=GOOD!
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
January 20, 2002 11:10:07 AM

OK, thanks for the additional information - obviously this engineer doesn't touch Athlon's for the same reason many other people don't. I guess he sticks with what he knows works fine.

The reason I was asking him about Athlon's was because I wanted to upgrade and wanted some advice. Does anyone know if my SB Audigy would run OK with an Athlon? It's just I heard that there are hardware issues with installing these, i.e. not installing properly, popping & hissing etc...

I want a gaming system, but keep hearing about hardware issues, AMDs running hot and needing several fans / high wattage PSUs etc.

Cheers!
January 20, 2002 11:23:07 AM

SB audiologys work fine, even with via chipsets which have problems with sb live cards.(they fixxed their pci compliance).

The hissing and popping was only an issue on older kt133a boards with via north and south bridges, not a current issue, but many old timers still hate via because of it.(even I generally try to avoid via northbridges.)

Quote:
I want a gaming system, but keep hearing about hardware issues, AMDs running hot and needing several fans / high wattage PSUs etc.



Here is the honest truth on those things.

Amd chips run no hotter than p4 chips, if you do not overclock the amd chips you require the RETAIL DEFAULT HEATSINK, and thats it, POSSIBLY 1 case fan depending on your house's temprature. A non overclocked amd system set up like this will run like a dream!.


As for the high wattage psus, that is not entirely true, an amd system will run on a good quality 300w psu, a 350w is generally reccomended for very fast amd systems, this adds little cost to the system, also a better psu serves you in the long run with more stability overall.(on p4 and amd systems).

The best choice for a processor on a gaming rig IMO is a nice amd axp1600+ and a very nice videocard. Anything faster is not worth the extra cash IMO.

Northwood chips are fine, but they are very spendy and are not worth the cost unless you massivly overclock them, something which is not guarenteed to work.

There is NO reason stability wise or quality wise, to choose intel over amd, the only reason to is.
A: brand loyalty
B: the name
C: Massive overclocking for northwoods.


Dont buy any of the crap any trolls will feed you on this forum, especially intel_inside, and amdmeltdown. They dont even know what they are talking about when it comes to intel processors.


Any more questions?

"The Cash Left In My Pocket,The BEST Benchmark"
No Overclock+stock hsf=GOOD!
January 20, 2002 5:10:08 PM

Quote:
He said some of the software they use refuses to run on AMD, like Ghost.

Ignorance! Mine (TBird 1000@1400) runs perfectly well with <b>Ghost</b>

:smile: Good or Bad have no meaning at all, depends on what your point of view is.
January 20, 2002 7:08:38 PM

lol more personal attacks from matisaro. Don't listen to what he says, it takes ALOT of work to make an amd system stable. If you like extra work then by all means go for it though.

<i>Hi I am from Canada, I don't use amd cause they melt my igloo eh.</i>
January 20, 2002 10:19:30 PM

(your sig)
dude, you put the CPU outside, that way you get free cooling... that's what i did, until the penguins ate it, (they like that organic stuff) oh wait, penguins don't live in the arctic...

hmm, i'd better lay off the coke... :eek: 

:wink: Engineering is the science of making life simple, by making it more complicated.
January 20, 2002 10:39:27 PM

no penguins, but polar bears and lemmings.. yes

<i>Hi I am from Canada, I don't use amd cause they melt my igloo eh.</i>
January 21, 2002 8:30:09 AM

If you say so intel_inside, lol.

"The Cash Left In My Pocket,The BEST Benchmark"
No Overclock+stock hsf=GOOD!
January 21, 2002 9:32:12 AM

Hey, there. I was kinda following this thread for a while and can see that no body here was working with Win2k Server for real and just bubbling what they could find on Internet. From my experience (that means what I really witnessed) I can tell you that AMD is no good for Win2k 24/7 Server (I am using Athlon for my WinME game rig though). If you don't want to "troubleshoot" your rig with "why in the mother's name it hard locked on me for no reason" question, stay away from it. P3 is the cheapest and most reliable way to go.

..this is very useful and helpful place for information...
January 21, 2002 9:45:00 AM

""The guy you talked to dosent know what hes talking about, there is no software which WONT run on amd."" (do you mean "properly"?)

Sorry, but I have a feeling that you probably just came out of the forest... Even Windows XP had problems with laptops build on AMD chips and had to be patched up by MS through downloading.

..this is very useful and helpful place for information...
January 21, 2002 10:11:21 AM

Quote:
I was kinda following this thread for a while and can see that no body here was working with Win2k Server for real and just bubbling what they could find on Internet.

Actually, I worked with both WinNT 4 and Win2K Server on my AMD box, and they <i>did</i> run 24/7 for months--even running games et al on it. In fact, when I last used Win2K, it still had nVidia 5.22 drivers on it, simply because I never wanted to change the driver and be forced to reboot.

Now I exclusively run Linux on that box, and I run that 24x7 as well. Only time I reboot is for a kernel update.

Oh, and my longest running box? An AMD 5x86-133 processor, over five years old, which once maintained an uptime of over a year before I decided to upgrade the kernel. It still serves as my firewall, and it still never crashes or locks up.

<i>If a server crashes in a server farm and no one pings it, does it still cost four figures to fix?
January 21, 2002 10:15:54 AM

Blah, what are you talking about, do you have links to proof of these claims asides from your "experience".


What laptop issues are you commenting on, Perhaps you should see this link <A HREF="http://213.219.40.69/12110104.htm" target="_new">http://213.219.40.69/12110104.htm&lt;/A>, since you brought up the issue of cpu patches and issues in windows xp.


I showed you mine, now show me your proof of an issue with mobile athlon chips and windows xp, instead of just talking out of your ass and calling people trolls.

Amd systems when on good motherboards are JUST as stable as intel systems, claiming otherwise is testament to either your A: bias, or B: ignorance. Take your pick.

"The Cash Left In My Pocket,The BEST Benchmark"
No Overclock+stock hsf=GOOD!
January 21, 2002 10:17:15 AM

Quote:
Hey, there. I was kinda following this thread for a while and can see that no body here was working with Win2k Server for real and just bubbling what they could find on Internet. From my experience (that means what I really witnessed) I can tell you that AMD is no good for Win2k 24/7 Server (I am using Athlon for my WinME game rig though). If you don't want to "troubleshoot" your rig with "why in the mother's name it hard locked on me for no reason" question, stay away from it. P3 is the cheapest and most reliable way to go.



Lol, does anyone else find it ironic he questions amds stability but runs windows me at home?

"The Cash Left In My Pocket,The BEST Benchmark"
No Overclock+stock hsf=GOOD!
January 21, 2002 10:40:12 AM

Matisaro:
Ehhh...no offense, but you might want to lay off him this time. :wink: theinquirer.net had the article on the WinXP+AMDlaptop issue as well. I remember seeing it, I'm just rather too tired/lazy to dig it up at the moment.

blah:
Sorry about you getting drilled, man, I get the feeling that you really <i>are</i> honest about this. But you've also got to realize that you're not everyone, and other people have had better Athlon experiences than you.

It could be that you missed something, or that you just have a slightly flaky part somewhere. Believe me, I've built enough servers to know that it can happen on both sides of the CPU fence.

<i>If a server crashes in a server farm and no one pings it, does it still cost four figures to fix?
January 21, 2002 10:46:44 AM

Quote:

Even Windows XP had problems with laptops build on AMD chips and had to be patched up by MS through downloading

wrong. its not that win Xp had problems runing AMD Laptops. the patch activates PowerNow technolgy built in to Athlon4 chips... in order to save battary life. it doesnt Fix and stablity/compatbilty isues... just enable a feature who should have been enabled in the first place.


<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by IIB on 01/21/02 03:32 PM.</EM></FONT></P>
January 21, 2002 2:26:07 PM

Kelledin, I know, that was the point of my link, I was assuming the issue he spoke of was the power now issue, so I linked him to the same issue on the intel side of the fence, to show it was not an amd issue, the call for proof was to any other issues besides that one.

"The Cash Left In My Pocket,The BEST Benchmark"
No Overclock+stock hsf=GOOD!
January 22, 2002 11:07:24 AM

""Amd systems when on good motherboards are JUST as stable as intel systems""

If it were true, Dell would sell them long time ago, and corporate guys would stuff their desktops with those things.

""claiming otherwise is testament to either your A: bias, or B: ignorance. Take your pick.""

I don't even mind to be called "plain stupid" for that matter, it makes no difference in my life.

""instead of just talking out of your ass and calling people trolls.""

I haven't called anyone anyhow, you did, and we used to say that "the hat is always burning on the theif" (get a clue ;)  <A HREF="http://zdnet.com.com/2100-1106-802566.html?legacy=zdnn" target="_new">Here</A> is another one for you to enjoy, so you will sleep happily tonight ;) 


""Lol, does anyone else find it ironic he questions amds stability but runs windows me at home?""

And you are saying that you are "some body spesual", hehe, you can't even get best PC Nintendo to run stable, and my 5 years old kid can manage play on it without crashing for few days in a row. Go figure who is the "guru" here, hehe.

Anyway, I just gave my point of view to the guy, and if you get paranoid by people's thoughts, get a place in Africa where there are nobody, so they won't bother your "mighty" knowledge and intelligence (take your pick where).

..this is very useful and helpful place for information...
January 22, 2002 11:22:33 AM

""But you've also got to realize that you're not everyone, and other people have had better Athlon experiences than you.""

I perfectly clear realizing that. I have had a good experience with AMD most of the time also, but the guy says he needs a "reliable" thing that will serve his needs with peace of the mind for a long time, and as being nice to the guy who asked an honest question I gave him an honest advise, coz AMD setup really locks and hard for no reason (lots of people here can say the same), so I don't want the guy come back and say "blah, you stupid idiot, what did you tell me?" and stuff like that. And don't worry about Matisaro, I can play with this kind of "upset lady" attitude without getting upset myself ;) 


..this is very useful and helpful place for information...
January 22, 2002 11:22:36 AM

Quote:
""Amd systems when on good motherboards are JUST as stable as Intel systems""

If it were true, Dell would sell them long time ago, and corporate guys would stuff their desktops with those things.

LoL, so dell not selling amds means AMD chips are unstable, I'm sure dells guaranteed supply of Intel chips has nothing to do with it. You call that proof?? I call that retarded logic and a piss poor attempt to justify your FUD.


Quote:
""claiming otherwise is testament to either your A: bias, or B: ignorance. Take your pick.""

I don't even mind to be called "plain stupid" for that matter, it makes no difference in my life.


That's good, you may or may not be an idiot, but you spread mindless FUD nonetheless.


Quote:
""instead of just talking out of your ass and calling people trolls.""

I haven't called anyone anyhow,

I took this

Quote:
Sorry, but I have a feeling that you probably just came out of the forest...


As an insult, was I in error? I doubt it.



Quote:
And you are saying that you are "somebody spesual", hehe, you can't even get best PC Nintendo to run stable, and my 5 years old kid can manage play on it without crashing for few days in a row. Go figure who is the "guru" here, hehe.


I would be offended at your insinuation that I don't know what I'm talking about, that is if this comment made any sense and didn't make you sound like a moron.

What the hell are you talking about, best Nintendo PC? Please stop smoking crack before posting on the forums.


Quote:
Anyway, I just gave my point of view to the guy, and if you get paranoid by people's thoughts, get a place in Africa where there are nobody, so they won't bother your "mighty" knowledge and intelligence (take your pick where).


Your thoughts and knowledge are FUD, FUD you cannot back up, and FUD which I pointed out was wrong. Now back it up or shut up with your FUD bullshit.


PS: The link you provided. <A HREF="http://zdnet.com.com/2100-1106-802566.html?legacy=zdnn" target="_new">http://zdnet.com.com/2100-1106-802566.html?legacy=zdnn&...;/A> was another Intel bug, it doesn't help to prove your assertion AMD chips have windows XP bugs if you provide links showing Intel chips are in fact the ones with bugs. Just a friendly note of advice, since you seem to have so much trouble with things like, logic and debate.

"The Cash Left In My Pocket,The BEST Benchmark"
No Overclock+stock hsf=GOOD!
January 22, 2002 11:30:40 AM

""PS: The link you provided. http://zdnet.com.com/2100-1106-802566.html?legacy=zdnn was another Intel bug,""

gg, hehe, you are a good laugh, man, go get some sleep, lol, that was exactly what I thought you need in order to have peace in your mind, that's why I gave it to you in hope it will help you sleep better, lol


PS: and also it says that I am aware of Intel's bugs as well, but still prefer it to AMD any day for the Windows server.


..this is very useful and helpful place for information...
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
January 22, 2002 11:42:39 AM

I use a dual P3 733 linux box server at home.

Main reasons:

· Motherboard & CPU's are very cheap (80$ mobo + 50$ per cpu)

· Run's rock solid (i never have switched off that machine)

· No heat problem (25ºC..35ºC each processor with standard air fan cooling)

· Great performance due to LinuX :D 
January 22, 2002 11:46:50 AM

I am not gonna argue with any body here, read <A HREF="http://www.eweek.com/article/0,3658,s=25102&a=17254,00...." target="_new">this</A> and decide for yourself, if you please. I care less what you run and what you like, it makes no difference for me (get a clue, man).

..this is very useful and helpful place for information...
January 22, 2002 12:46:14 PM

<<<Fact is, AMD's probably never screwed up as badly as Intel did with the 1.13GHz Coppermine>>>

hahahah amd 750 chipset... oh yeah and they didn't have the balls to recall it.
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
January 22, 2002 8:42:17 PM

>but the guy says he needs a "reliable" thing that will
>serve his needs with peace of the mind for a long time

I see the same thing happening in my company every day (among other things, we sell, install and maintain servers, mini's, even mainframes). Anyway, you'll notice servers rarely use the latest available technologie. For instance, you'll be hard pressed to find any P4 based "low" end x86 servers at all, they'll be P3 based. Why ? P4 is too new, unproven, too hot.. whatever. It will take a while. Corporate buyers hate new gadgets, they want proven reliability, especially for servers and mission critical stuff. They wont take chances there. Now, does that mean the P4 is instable ? I wouldnt say so. Neither is the Athlon when based on a proper board (like the MPX server boards). However, these boards are so "new" in corporate way of thinking, most companies wont even give it a chance. Regardless of how stable it is. Reputation is what matters here, and I'll gladly admit AMD doesnt have the reputation intel has (mostly, because of crappy VIA chipsets however). Even if AMD would sell rebranded P3 chips at half the price, it would probably still take AMD 3 to 5 years to really enter the corporate server market.

As for the power and heat issues, they are real. At least, when you are talking high density low profile servers (1u cases). Its not easy to build a 1U dual Athlon rack server. it can be done, but its not as easy as when you take 2 .13 tualatins. We'll have to wait for .13 Athlons before AMD can really make a dent in that market. When you talking upright servers (you know, desktop alike cases), Athlons on a AMD 760 MPX board are a perfect choice for a 24/7 "mission critical" machine. Read Anand's article. Try his site, I asure you its uptime is better than this ones, and its MUCH faster (i know, more likely to be caused by better software, but its not crashing, or whatever). BTW, he did build 1U Athlon servers for his forum database.



= The views stated herein are my personal views, and not necessarily the views of my wife. =
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
January 22, 2002 8:45:51 PM

>read this and decide for

Its a long article.. not seeing anything special in there, what are you referring to exactly ?

= The views stated herein are my personal views, and not necessarily the views of my wife. =
January 23, 2002 12:00:59 AM

""what are you referring to exactly ?""

The article says nothing in particular, just that at this point Microsoft (even Athlon was for 2 years out now and really kicks) still supports Intel more than others and all its software developing on Intel based machines, so all Pentium bugs can be worked out before the software releases, especially server and networking stuff they say optimized for Pee chips. I think that says something about what can be better used for server, or does it?

..this is very useful and helpful place for information...
January 23, 2002 6:20:12 AM

What was so unstable about the AMD750? It may not have been much for features, but it was(is) quite stable. A friend of mine still has one of those "ancient" Irongate boards working in a fileserver, and it's gotten wicked uptimes.

I seem to recall you suggesting it was unstable before, but you didn't really offer proof then either. If you don't actually <i>have</i> proof, I suggest you lay off the BS. :tongue:

<i>If a server crashes in a server farm and no one pings it, does it still cost four figures to fix?
January 23, 2002 8:10:01 AM

The only thing I could not get to work on K7M mobo was SCSI setup, it always seamed to looze SCSI drive even if I push it through Linux's partition capabilities and install windows on the top (ended up with corrupt registry and such), but otherwise it was a good gaming rig and the problem I think was with that particular mobo only. It was hard to get it going on that mobo, but once it was going, it was going...

..this is very useful and helpful place for information...
!