Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Upgradeable budget system

Tags:
Last response: in CPUs
Share
April 7, 2002 6:20:35 PM

Well folks, I'm taking my computer knowledge and applying it to a college room business where I build systems for my friends. Being college students, we have no money, so I tried to design a base system that would perform well in gaming (as that's what most of my friends care about) while being extremely upgradeable. Here's what I came up with:

Case: Antec SX635 - $79 from Newegg

I like Antec cases, most of my friends do (at least the way the look and the solid construction), and this is a mini version of the SX830/40 (which I have). It's 3 inches shorter than the 8xx, but strangely enough, it has just as many drive bays. Sadly, it only comes with one case fan instead of two. But it has mounts for two in the front and one in the back.


CPU: AMD Duron 1.2GHz, Retail - $72 from Newegg

I chose this because the older T-Birds are no longer available through most online vendors, and I like the retail version because the 3-year warrenty covers fan failure (which is good in a dusty/dirty enviroment like a dorm room).


MB: IWILL XP333, Retail - $86 from All-Star/SMK Components

I chose this because I like the ALi Magik chipset, as it's stable and performs well. And before anyone suggests it, I will not get a VIA chipset, as I have issues with a company that releases a product that should be a "beta" and then a few months later releases an "updated" version (i.e KT266 and KT266a). And, I don't want to get a ECS board, as it seems that they have a higher RMA rate than most other board makers.

Video Card: Hercules 3D Prophet 4500, OEM - $62 MicroPro

Well, I'm a big fan of the Kyro II, and when the SE version gets released, us old users will get some goodies in our drivers. I just like the way PowerVR has been handling everything. I just wish the Kyro III was out (though some who accurately predicted the release of the SE version (all the way to the naming scheme and time of announcement) say there will be something else released in June/July, and something really special for Christmas). Anywho, it works well, though it might take a hit from having a 1.2 Duron instead of the 1.2 T-Bird I have. SSE might help?

RAM: Crucial PC2100 - $85.49 from Crucial

It's Crucial, it's cheap. Need I say more?


As for the rest, it's a matter of CD-ROMs, monitors, sound cards, etc. Those most people already have, so they'll just swap them in (unless we run into ISA cards *shudder*). Really, the system is meant for upgrading, not out-of-the-box performance. In the end, it all costs around $450 after S&H and taxes. Not bad, I think. So, does anyone have any suggestions on how I can tweak this. Price has to stay low, and I want to keep working with AMD, since I know how to work with it. That's it really. Thanks.

Oh yeah, what do you think a good fee is to charge? 5% of total cost? I'm not looking to clean up here, just compensation for the time I'm going to spend, and the tech support I'll be doing afterwards.

-SammyBoy
April 7, 2002 7:00:24 PM

Everything looks good, but that Kyro will be hurting. I'd go for the GF2 GTS or Radeon7500 for only a bit more-~$85.
a c 159 à CPUs
April 7, 2002 8:49:24 PM

If you don't mind a little extra noise, the maxtop case (about $47 newegg) comes with 3 case fans and an amd approved 350 watt power supply. I use it with an overclocked p4, and the 5 volt rail reading never goes below 5.0.
Related resources
April 7, 2002 8:56:29 PM

Well...heres my 2 cents

If you can find any still around, the AXP 1500+ is dirt cheap and relatively more powerful than a Duron. I'd shoot for maybe $100 dollars for the AXP. Good choice for mobo, Ali has good chipsets. As for the video card, the KyroII only really does well in games running on 2D modes...I would get a Geforce2 Pro 64MB for maybe $120 or a Radeon 7200 or 7500, running perhaps $100-150. All three cards cut a good figure in gaming. Good ram choice, make sure they don't gyp you with CL2.5 or even CL3.0 ram, bad stuff.

compensation for work? maybe like around a techs simple service job. $20 or $40. Not too high. Just to let them know you are doing them a favor.

"When there's a will, there's a way."
April 7, 2002 9:52:18 PM

Newegg still has Athlon Thunderbirds but use the keyword <b>thunderbird</b> in the search. The 1.33 (OEM) is currently $78

Crucial just lowered their price on 256MB DDR, CAS2.5 to $69.29. Get it while it's hot.


<b>I have so many cookies I now have a FAT problem!</b>
April 7, 2002 10:43:45 PM

I know they have 'em, but I'm looking for retail, which they don't have. Reason being, we (we being my friends and I) all live in a dirty and dusty enviroment, and given the amount of care these systems will receive from their owners (e.g. none), anything that takes away chance is a good thing. The 3-year warrenty will cover my butt if the fan dies and fries the CPU.
April 7, 2002 11:00:08 PM

See, I need to keep the price at $450 or less, and that includes tax and S&H. The reason is that we are all dirt poor here (a $25,000 a year school will do that). So, the cheaper the better, so my design goal was cheap now with a good upgrade path, so it's still cheap to make it faster later on. The Kyro scales well with CPU performance, so if someone wants to spend $40 more or so to get a 1.33GHz T-Bird "C", they can do that, and it will really help them. I looked at the Radeon 7500, but everything I've read shows me that unless you are running the 64MB DDR version, it will be, at best, on par with the Kyro II. Granted, in a 1.2GHz Duron system, it probably would do better, but not enough to warrant the $40-70 increase in price (which is what I found, in my searches last night, when trying to find a 7500 w/ 64MB DDR and that ran at the original spec, clock-wise. Many of the generics are lower speced GPUs and memory). So, that's why I decided to stick with the KyroII. Also, until I have used a Radeon myself, and know what it can and cannot do, as well as the little glitches, I cannot put it into a box I built for someone else. And performance, I have a 1.2 T-Bird C with a KyroII, and in Dungeon Siege, which looks to be a pretty heavy game in terms of graphics, I can push 35-50FPS at max detail in 1024x768-32bit mode. In some areas, I can go as high as 70FPS, while outside in the world, with enviromental effects, I drop to 25-35. Quite playable, and considering my room mate (the first probable customer) is playing that game around 10FPS at <i>best</i>, he'll be happy. And the best part is, I can overclock the CPU and it will affect the card performance quite nicely.

So, for now, I think I'm going to stick to the KyroII.

-SammyBoy
April 7, 2002 11:01:06 PM

-Crucial just lowered their price on 256MB DDR, CAS2.5 to $69.29. Get it while it's hot

CL2.5? That's lower end ram buddy, better off spending the extra 10 bucks for some CL2

"When there's a will, there's a way."
April 7, 2002 11:04:34 PM

You can't make a "decent" or "great" system when you put that much of a clamp on the budget.

Grant it, some of the parts will cut it, but ditch the Kyro, its no good for higher end games. Better off getting a lower end Gf2 or Radeon 7.2k or 7.5k. No one can play (enjoyably) at 10FPS, that is just flickering and screen jumping. 45FPS is the bare minimum to play comfortably for several hours. The base which most people go by is 60FPS which is decent enough to be considered highly stable and easy on the eyes. If you want budget, the Gf2 Mx400 beats the KyroII at the same price.

"When there's a will, there's a way."
April 7, 2002 11:36:19 PM

Actually, the Kyro II will destroy the GF2MX400 at anything more than 640x480x16. And, since I am playing Dungeon Siege at 800x600x32, and can play it in 1028x768x32 without serious FPS problems, I doubt that even a GF2Pro could handle that. I have played DS for about 5 hours today without problems, the whole time, the FPS hovering from 25-60. The point of picking the KyroII is that if someone wants a T-Bird instead of a Duron, or even an XP, the performance of the system will increase greatly. Plus, the image quality is better than a GF2. I have yet to find a card that can perform at the same level as a KyroII that costs even 30% more. And, in the new Unreal2 engine, it still is very respectable, and matches the Radeon 7500 w/ 64MB DDR, which is 100% more, pricewise. Yes, it's software T&L will be adversely affected by a Duron 1.2GHz, but once the KyroII SE is released, there will be a new set of drivers, that much like Detonator XP drivers when they first appeared, will give a boost to old KyroIIs. It's what I'm comfortable with, and is really the best bang for the buck.

-SammyBoy
April 7, 2002 11:37:48 PM

Also, the Crucial CL2.5 can be run at CL2 no problem. I've been doing that with mine for the last 9 months now with no problem.

-SammyBoy
April 7, 2002 11:43:42 PM

I'd like to see you back that up with benchmarks. The Gf2 Pro and Mx can beat the Kyro I and II anyday, hands down. Dungeon siege will be crippled in 32bit above 800x600 for the KyroII, it is based in Directx7, which the Kyro does not like, due to its architechture. Layer graphing, as the Kyro performs, does not perform well in 3D games. Image quality is better? I think not, unless you can find some real proof.

"When there's a will, there's a way."
April 7, 2002 11:57:48 PM

hmm, i was planning on building a internet (e-mail, word processing) machine for my parents... was going to go with the
MSI MS-6378 SocketA Mainboard w/Audio / Lan / Video / Modem
and a duron... should let me make the whole thing for under 450$ CDN

:wink: Engineering is the science of making life simple, by making it more complicated.
April 8, 2002 12:10:15 AM

I was only pointing out that Crucial lowered their price from $86 to $69 this past week.

Besides, he said "budget" and "upgradeable". Where can you get "high-end", CAS2 memory for only $10 more (than $69)? Crucial has free shipping.

Also, Crucial memory will do CAS2 at stock speeds (and more). Plus, SammyBoy probably won't be do much higher speeds with those Duron 1.2's

<b>I have so many cookies I now have a FAT problem!</b>
April 8, 2002 12:24:06 AM

eh... not too bad.

think u should ditch the kryo thou, a geforce2pro will give u good performance, and can overclock considerably.

just wondering about getting a kt333 instead of the xp333. can run with standard PC1600/2100 now, and upgrade to PC2700 later. non raid mobo for cheapness.

You're an embarrisment to nature you know that?
April 8, 2002 2:24:22 AM

Quote:

just wondering about getting a kt333 instead of the xp333. can run with standard PC1600/2100 now, and upgrade to PC2700 later. non raid mobo for cheapness.

The XP333 doesn't need PC2700.

AMD technology + Intel technology = Intel/AMD Pentathlon IV; the <b>ULTIMATE</b> PC processor
April 8, 2002 3:37:43 PM

Hey, I've been playing Dungeon Siege since its release now, and it is anything but crippled on my KyroII. As I stated before, I can average 35FPS at 800x600x32, and 30FPS at 1028x768x32. While oc'ing the card doesn't do much, oc'ing my CPU 200MHz gives it a nice 10% boost overall. You want proof of other KyroII superiority in terms of performance/price ratio? Here ya go:

<A HREF="http://www.anandtech.com/showdoc.html?i=1580&p=5" target="_new">http://www.anandtech.com/showdoc.html?i=1580&p=5&lt;/A>
<A HREF="http://www6.tomshardware.com/graphic/01q2/010425/kyroII..." target="_new">http://www6.tomshardware.com/graphic/01q2/010425/kyroII...;/A>

The first link is to Anandtech's very recent testing of 15 GPUs under the new Unreal Performance Test. As you can see, the KyroII, at 640x800x32, has a <i>27.6% higher</i> score than the MX400 and is only 11.9% lower than the GF2Pro. At 800x600x32, the gap between the KyroII and MX400 increases to 41.3%, and the KyroII <i>pulls ahead</i> of the GF2Pro by 2% That, my friend, is a drubbing, plain and simple. And that is a new benchmark, designed to stress the GF3s and R8500s. I quote:
Quote:
If you'll remember, the original Unreal engine was geared for software rendering but it has evolved into something that is entirely geared for hardware accelerated 3D rendering thus making it a much better benchmark of GPUs. Eventually Epic will have a version of the Unreal Performance Test 2002 that will encompass every feature in the engine that will eventually make its way to Unreal Tournament II among other titles.

And as to the Tom's Hardware link, that page is the beginning of the 32-bit testing, and you'll see, again, that the KyroII is able to come close to, and in higher resolutions, beat, the GF2GTS.

If you wish to continue this line of arguement, I can keep digging up benches that will show, again and again, that the KyroII, even on new, yet-unreleased game engines, is able to hold it's own. Yes, I have a concern that the KyroII will take a performance hit with a Duron 1.2GHz instead of an Athlon or XP, but as a base budget system, the upgradability of the system is the most important, and I can tell those who want it that their gaming experience will get better with even a XP 1500+ (which would be $38 more). That will outperform my system. I'm not sure, sir, where you get your information on KyroII and GF2-based cards, but it is certainly outdated and on the verge of FUD.

-SammyBoy
April 8, 2002 4:19:00 PM

While I agree with you that the kryo can beat the mx400, the gf2 pro clearly trounces it, who cares if its 2% faster at a resolution which grabs you 15fsb total, it is the same argument made for the origional radeon, that at higher resolutions an color depths it can pull ahead, except that both cards, at 1600x1200 render games unplayable.

:wink: The Cash Left In My Pocket,The BEST Benchmark :wink:
April 8, 2002 5:41:55 PM

Well, in the Unreal test at Anandtech, 800x600x32 the KyroII was still playable, at 34.9FPS average. So, there will be times that it drops to 15 or so, but others were it's at 45. I guess I have issues with people trying to tell me that what I'm doing right now (running Dungeon Siege at 800x600x32 without any problems) is impossible, and I should spend $75 in a another box for a card that underperforms compared to my current card, which will cost $62. Yes, it does reach the point of unplayability in high res, but the point is that, for a KyroII, the best way to remedy that situation is to over clock the card a few MHz, and then OC then CPU. The KyroII scales better than most other cards I've seen out there when paired with a faster CPU. I think that's why PowerVR is pursuing the software/hardware T&L hybrid that they are supposed to be putting in the KyroII SE. Eh, it may not be much, but really, I trust my KyroII to run all games, old and new. Heck, looking at the readme of Dungeon Seige will give you a list of problems with the GF series (namely fog issues), but the KyroII might fatal error if you change the res in game, which I've done many times without problems. The game just looks sweet on my system, and I have no complaints about the performance when the detail in set to max and there is trilinear filtering at 800x600x32 and even 1028x768x32. Bottom line, it works.

-SammyBoy
April 9, 2002 1:12:50 AM

Well, like I said, I'm not a fan of VIA, and I've had great luck with ALi Magik. I'm not looking for extreme performance here, just stability and support for all current Socket A CPUs. I would also guess, since IWill didn't demo a new Socket A 'board at CeBit, that the XP333-(R), or at least the latest revisions of it, will be able to handle the T-Bred when it comes out, if my friends so desire to upgrade to that come next school year. So, that's my story.

-SammyBoy
April 9, 2002 3:21:53 AM

Alright, you should think several minutes before you boast. First of all, 30-35FPS is barely above flicker, hardly playable unless you live in the slow lane of life. That low of FPS is just unplayable for more than 20 minutes tops without straining your eyes.

-the KyroII, at 640x800x32, has a 27.6% higher score than the MX400 and is only 11.9% lower than the GF2Pro. At 800x600x32, the gap between the KyroII and MX400 increases to 41.3%, and the KyroII pulls ahead of the GF2Pro by 2%

At the very lowest resolution, it is the only setting the Kyro can handle without being flooded. Keep in mind, a Duron is going to castrate the performance even more here, making the video card more important than the CPU. In these tests, the highest end CPU was used, an AXP 2000+. With a Duron, the Kyro stands no chance against the Gf2 series.

-That, my friend

I'm not your friend =p

-And as to the Tom's Hardware link, that page is the beginning of the 32-bit testing, and you'll see, again, that the KyroII is able to come close to, and in higher resolutions, beat, the Gf2 GTS.

THG compared the Kyro to the weaker versions of the Gf2, namely the Mx-200 and GTS 32MB. These cards not only have half the memory of the Kyro, but are generally castrated by their very slow memory. The Gf2 GTS costs less than the Kyro currently, yields better performance overall, and is a better buy.

-If you wish to continue this line of arguement, I can keep digging up benches that will show, again and again, that the KyroII, even on new, yet-unreleased game engines, is able to hold it's own. Yes, I have a concern that the KyroII will take a performance hit with a Duron 1.2GHz instead of an Athlon or XP

A "budget system", in your humble opinion, has crap parts. No, I don't think the Kyro II is crap, I think there is better fare out there. You would be better off spending an extra $25 to get an AXP 1500+ or 1600+ and a better card.

-I'm not sure, sir, where you get your information on KyroII and GF2-based cards, but it is certainly outdated and on the verge of FUD.

Perhaps unlike you, I read from any source I can get my hands on as well as the benchmarking and experience I have with computers. I've been to many local computer shops and retailers, and previewed many systems. Not one favored the Kyro, due to its weak performance compared to Nvidia and Ati cards.

"When there's a will, there's a way."
April 9, 2002 8:17:22 AM

your post was so confusing to a moron like me that until the end i couldn't tell wether you were supporting the Kyro II or bashing it :( 
April 9, 2002 4:11:28 PM

Well then, I guess I'm abnormal, since I've been playing DS for hours at a time at those supposedly eye-straining FPS. Never had problems here. And my roommate, the one who is getting the upgrade, has been playing it for hours at a time at 10FPS. This isn't flicker. It's choppy. I take it you've never actually experienced that for prolonged periods of time before. Flicker is what you get when the monitor refresh rate is too low. That does cause eye-strain. Choppy is what you get when the frame rate drops too low to look smooth. 30FPS is considered the threshold of smoothness because the brain sees anything more than about 23-27FPS as a smooth picture. So, if the average is 30FPS, then there will be swings of 5FPS on each side mostly, with times of outlying 10-15FPS swings.

Again, I realize that the KyroII will be castrated by a Duron, but at the time, that's what I was told to work with. Now, after Crucial dropped memory prices, my roommate told me to go ahead and up the processor. I was going to throw in a XP1500+, Retail, but for some reason, Newegg doesn't have it on their webpage, even though they have it advertised on Pricewatch and that price was updated Apr. 8th at 10am. So, for $10 more, I found that Newegg was selling an XP1700+, Retail, with no S&H charges. So, in the end, he will be getting better frame rates that I am, and right now he considers the game on my computer "beautiful to behold."

I did not fill this box with crap parts. The Duron and KyroII (the only parts that could be considered even remotely crap) are value-line, where as the rest much higher price points. This rig will be much more upgradable than mine, seeing as my MB won't support the XP line. All my parts have been received by the hardware community with open arms at some point. Yes, some parts are older, which is why they made it into a budget box.

Finally, I'll just reiterate that the KyroII does not have weak performance. When it came out, it could trounce the current crop of cards while costing 50% less. Today, the KryoII is low-end, but still can be competitive if compared with the XP line of processors. And it still costs less than Nvidia's budget line GPUs, and performs better. When looking in the under $80 realm for video cards, nothing can beat the KyroII.

-SammyBoy
April 10, 2002 1:06:56 AM

-right now he considers the game on my computer "beautiful to behold."

must have low expectations =/

-I did not fill this box with crap parts. The Duron and KyroII (the only parts that could be considered even remotely crap) are value-line

I never said they were crap. There is just an enormous gain by spending a little bit more to get better parts. That's just FUD

-This rig will be much more upgradable than mine, seeing as my MB won't support the XP line.

not true, get a bios upgrade

-Finally, I'll just reiterate that the KyroII does not have weak performance. When it came out, it could trounce the current crop of cards while costing 50% less.

well it didn't come out yesterday. There is better stuff out there now


-Today, the KryoII is low-end, but still can be competitive if compared with the XP line of processors. And it still costs less than Nvidia's budget line GPUs, and performs better

you said you wanted to use a Duron. all of a sudden comes an AXP (at my advice) and everything is good. No, it does not cost less, and it does perform worse.

-When looking in the under $80 realm for video cards, nothing can beat the KyroII.

Geforce2 Mx-400-$60
Geforce2 GTS 64MB-$75
Radeon 7200 DDR-$80
Geforce2 Pro 64MB-$90

-And my roommate, the one who is getting the upgrade, has been playing it for hours at a time at 10FPS.

Unless you have a very slow witted mind, or very poor reflexes, you don't play at 10FPS. Look at any website, no one will agree that 10FPS is playable. 30 is acceptable at best, but still poor.

"When there's a will, there's a way."
April 10, 2002 9:51:27 PM

First, Dungeon Seige has an on-screen FPS counter. It clearly states that on my system the game runs between 25-45 FPS, while on his, he is lucky to hit 15 FPS. Period. If you wish to continue insulting my roommate's intelligence when he is unable to defend himself, I'd love to see a list of your credentials. Considering he is ranked in the top of our class at one of the best colleges in the USA, I'd think he has a few IQ points on you.

The AXP decision is not related to your suggestion at all, but rather the decisions of Crucial to drop memory prices on 256MB PC2100 by $15 and Newegg to drop prices of AXP Retail processors. I was going to throw in a 1500+, since the price went down to $110, compared to $72 for the Duron. That $38 dollar difference was cut to a $23 difference, and my roommate was willing to swallow that. Plus, Newegg was offering free shipping, saving another $7. Then there was no 1500+ in stock, and the 1600+ and 1700+ retails cost $120, which he okayed. So, I got the 1700+, and the final cost for everything including S&H was $462.72, $12.72 more than the target price, but he was willing to pay it.

Now, again, I'll tell you, the KyroII is $62, and recently trounced the MX400 in a new game. Even in the old benchmarks with the old MX, the KyroII trounced it, and that was using a 1.2GHz T-Bird. A Duron1.2GHz+KyroII would have offered similar performance to the MX, and would have scaled better if the CPU was overclocked. Why would I buy a card that is clearly worse than the KyroII. As for the GTS and Pro, I have not found them for less than $85 anywhere. I know those perform better than the KyroII in a majority of games, but they cost too much for my roommate. And, many of those tests I read were done on lesser machines, and since the KyroII scales well (just bumping my processor up 200MHz to 1.4 gives it a 5-10% in frame rates), an AXP1700+ should give it quite a bump. And, since according to Anandtech, it's equal to the GF2Pro when paired with a fast CPU, why pay 27% more for, at most, a 10% increase in performance?

And as to my MB not supporting AXP, this is true. I purchased it a few months before the AXP debut, and my MB rev., 1.04, is not Palomino compatible. It has to be 1.10 or greater. This is straight from Asus's website, though I suspect that it might be a ploy to get people to upgrade. But, I've also heard people say they have problems with AXP processors in A7A266, and I wonder if they have an older revision of the board, as I do. Nonetheless, I don't need one, and I would want a new MB before I got a new CPU.

-SammyBoy
April 11, 2002 4:25:57 PM

You should have considered the Geforce 4 MX 440 video cards. If you search <A HREF="http://www.pricewatch.com" target="_new">pricewatch</A> you can find them for around $80-85 so add in some shipping and for $90-95 you'll be getting extremely better FPS than a Kyro II. Especially if you overclock the video card a bit. Also I've heard good and bad things about that Iwill, hopefully you'll get the revision that works flawless and has no problems, but most of those boards get beat by AMD 761 chipset based boards, and Via KT266a boards unless the CPU is overclocked running 166 FSB.
I think its kinda silly that Athlon XPs are dropping in price so much they can compete with the value CPUs :smile:

If my response is brief and vague its because the info you provided is too!
April 11, 2002 5:27:55 PM

Yeah, I thought about the MX440, but after learning that they don't have full DX8 compatibility (such as the pixel and vertex shaders) I figured that it wasn't worth it. Anandtech on the GF4MX:
Quote:
A significant disappointment is the GeForce4 MX which fails to even outperform the GeForce2 Ti 200. This is exactly why we recommend either going for the GeForce3 Ti 200, the Radeon 8500LE or waiting for the GeForce4 Ti 4200; and this is only at 1024 x 768.

That is refering to the Unreal Performance Test 2002. And after looking further, it seems that under that test, according to Anandtech, the KyroII scores a 25.2 FPS in 1024x768x32 and the MX440 a 25.8. Both theoretically unplayable (though, I have played at that and worse in my long gaming career), but they are equal performers. But, I did seriously consider it, but Anandtech's refusal to recommend it made me think otherwise.

In the future, I would definately consider a different video card that supports DX8, but since I'm more than happy with the support I've revceived from PowerVR and the high quality drivers, I'm loath to jump ship until I see what the KyroII SE and the soon-to-be-announced KyroIII have to offer.

As to the IWill board, I too have heard good and bad. But, I'm certain that the board rev. I'll get is the 2.1, which is supposedly the flawless version that supports the latest CPUs. It's a retail version, and unless they haven't sold any at All-Star Components, I'd think that it was a more recent revision. Time will tell. And performance is not the greatest factor of mine, but rather the price, the chipset (Magik rev. C), and stability.

-SammyBoy

<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by SammyBoy on 04/11/02 12:30 PM.</EM></FONT></P>
April 11, 2002 5:34:26 PM

I just figured I'd warn you about the Iwill board, I remember reading a review about it and the reviewer removed a sticker that was on the PCB and underneath was the model number for another Iwill motherboard!
I can't remember what it was, either amd or intel based board, but it was not a specific PCB for the Iwill board. Eventually he got a newer revision and proved that the older PCB has many problems but the newer one was a good overclocker and ran just fine.

If my response is brief and vague its because the info you provided is too!
April 11, 2002 5:57:42 PM

I saw a similar review, and it was about the XP333. It might have been the same one even. But, the latest revisions, latest being a few months old, has it silkscreened onto the PCB, so I hope thats what I get. If not, I'll have issues with IWill.

Thanks for the heads up, though.

-SammyBoy
a b à CPUs
April 12, 2002 1:35:19 AM

You only need PC2700 if you overclock to 166MHz FSB. That applies to both the XP333 and KT333 boards. As well as the Leadtek Winfast 7350KDA.

What's the frequency, Kenneth?
!