Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Intel P3 933EB spec and temps?

Tags:
  • CPUs
  • Fan
Last response: in CPUs
Share
July 12, 2002 9:24:55 AM

I know it was not my smartest move, but I bought a OEM Slot1 P3 933EB (133) Coppermine to replace my OEM P3 700 (100) with it. Both are SEEC2 (second generation SLOT1). The fan swap was easy. I run a Dual fan on the SLOT1 CPU with each fan separately connected to the three pins on the MB to report temp and fan speed.

and yes, I did reset the MB to the new CPU and FSB.

When I started it up, fan two ran slow for several minutes, but as the temp warmed up, things got back to normal and maybe a bit faster than the previous fan speed.
It looks like the fans have settled in about 5000 RPM vs 4400 RPM on the P3 700.

Can you guys and gals recommend a reasonable temp range for this processor and for the warning alarm and separately the auto shutdown temp setting? Assuming the MB is anywhere in the ballpark of correct in it's reports.
It looks like the P3 933EB is settling in at about 175 degrees compared to about 156 degrees for the P3 700 in the same MB. MB is an ABIT not overclocked with the latest BIOS flash 70.

Also does the Coppermine have 256 or 512 L2 Cashe. INTEL's processor SPEED check software is indicating this chip is 256K Level 2 Cashe plus 16K Level one plus 16 k instructional Cashe.
Cpu stepping is 3 on Intel's processor identifier. Strange -- it appears that this CPU was delivered with the num turned off.

I replaced my ECC PC100 memory with PC133 which I do not know if it is also ECC, but it has the buffer chip on the end, so I assume it is ECC too.

I don't notice much processing improvement compared to my P3 700 (100). I would have thought the 100 FSB increase to 133 would have shown me something. The increase from 700 to 933 is about the same ratio of CPU speed increase. Certainly, the Coppermine changes to the cashe compared to the original Slot 1/SEEC2 P3 should help the improvement.

Any recommendations for a good diagnostic to burn this chip in and be sure, it understands all the instruction set?


Comments are requested to any and all the above. Is my thinking that far out in the bleachers?

Every working computer must be improved .... or replaced ...

More about : intel 933eb spec temps

July 12, 2002 1:46:49 PM

I've got three SECC2 systems and love all of them. Believe it or not they are more easily upgraded then a s370 board.

Both your 700 and 933 chips will be coppermines. Detailed specs on either processor can be found on the intel website. Coppermines have 256k of on-die L2 cache. Katmais had 512k of L2 cache on the BSB running at half the processor speed. I'd say 45C is a typical temp.

Your system should run 33% faster at any kind of number crunching. Do you have benchmarks from your previous setup that you can compare new benchmarks to? Maybe you have another component that is slowing you down considerably in day to day tasks, such as a very slow hard drive or video card.

With a current bios revision you should not be concerned about the board improperly recognizing your new processor.

Do you have at least 256mb of ram?

In what application do you not notice any processing improvement?

- JW
July 12, 2002 4:56:47 PM

Actually, I bought the 700 before the Coppermines and many Celerons were announced ... back when the L2 Cashe was half normal err... was it L2 half clock speed? It was half something. Anyway it's one of the first P3s at 700.

Thanks for the temp range.

No, I don't have any good benchmarks, but I can always put the old back if I get curious for real benchmarks. IE seems a bit more responsive, but everything else has been about the same. The card game for example was about the same. That game flew when I went from P3 500 to the 700.

I doubt it's the video card that much for what I'm doing. The card is ATI All In Wonder 128 32 meg AGP which should look at a 800x600 desktop and yawn. Same for most things I do. Internet and lower level games. I might put in a couple of games that I grew tired of but they kinda pushed the system a bit expecially the HD loading. That may be a way to see if the HD transfers are handled faster due to the 133 FSB compared to the old 100 FSB and 66 before that.

I'm not seeing any hard drive light causing a slowdown. Virtual Memory is rare for my system. I found a program that crunches numbers a lot, so I will try that as the results help a cancer researcher. It is supposed to push the CPU to full speed as it uses any normally not used CPU cycles. I'll report back on it's performance when I have a feel for that. I have the same program on my mom's P3 450, so I will have a feel for a comparison and the program has a scoring system of it's own (of sorts).



Here is the link if anybody is interested in puting their CPU to work. It seems friendlier than SETTI was. Does not slow down use of your computer as SETTI did for me anyway. Same concept. Your computer does a packet and sends it back.


http://members.ud.com/home.htm


It just seems no faster loading for example. The previous system was 3 sticks of 256 ECC memory. They were replace by 3 sticks of PC133 which I believe are ECC. Anywway, I left the ECC switch on the MB on and the system seems to be okay with that. It's not giving me a mem error message which it would if the ECC were not functional.

Again Thanks for the thoghts.

----------------------------------

Every working computer must be improved .... or replaced ...<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by Jeff68005 on 07/13/02 11:30 PM.</EM></FONT></P>
Related resources
July 12, 2002 5:32:13 PM

The fastest katmai (0.25 micron) processor ran at 600MHz. Anything above 600 is a coppermine (or tualatin).

http://processorfinder.intel.com/scripts/list.asp?ProcF...

Katmai (0.25): 512k L2 off die cache running at half processor speed.

Coppermine (0.18): Switch to 256k on die cache running at full processor speed.

Tualatin (0.13): Add L2 data prefetch

Tualatin-S (0.13): Switch to 512k on die cache at full speed and add data prefetch.

Run all the CPU tests in <A HREF="http://glibench.sourceforge.net/pub/clibench-0.7.15.zip" target="_new">clibench</A> and post the results here.

1) "Test" -> "Select all CPU tests"
2) "Test" -> "Run selected tests"
3) A "Test configuration" window will open, just hit "OK"
4) In a few seconds it'll start displaying results (seven tests total)

- JW
July 12, 2002 5:59:04 PM

I stand corrected. I should have said that I was unaware of coppermine until after I bought my 700, so that in my understanding, coppermine came later.
That explains the L2 cashe and why the card game improved from the 500 to the 700 and not again at 933 EB.

I pulled up a fish screensaver that I had turned off. The 933EB did breathe "life" into the fish compared to the 700.
I'll run the tests and get back to you.

Thanks again.

Every working computer must be improved .... or replaced ...
a b à CPUs
July 12, 2002 9:12:22 PM

Wow, did you know that most 700's would run 100% stable at 933MHz anyway? So what did you spend the money for?

Anyway, the SECC2 package was crap for only one reason-there were never any coolers of adequate size available for it. I would have suggested a Socket 370 CPU and a Slotket, for various reasons including the ability to use better coolers.

<font color=blue>At least half of all problems are caused by an insufficient power supply!</font color=blue>
July 12, 2002 9:23:18 PM

Not being a overclock tech, I went for the advertised to spec item. I have had few cooling problems with the dual fans I run.

Could I have risked it? sure. Just not my comfort level to do so.

Every working computer must be improved .... or replaced ...<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by Jeff68005 on 07/13/02 03:06 PM.</EM></FONT></P>
July 13, 2002 9:50:38 AM

Dhrystone 2.1 1913
Whetstone 687
Eight queens problem 3300
Matrix operations 38988
Number crunch 66761
Floating point 6734
Memory throughput 86811

Every working computer must be improved .... or replaced ...
July 13, 2002 10:04:45 AM

Update:

Now running CPU 79 C on the Bios measurement. That would be idle as only the MB is running.

It seems 32 C case air temp which would be close to room temp as I run open case.

I found the monitor software for the MB that works on Win98.
It says CPU temp 87.5 C with win98 and just IE and Zone alarm running.

When I run the cancer research, it goes to 90-92 C. I'm sure the fish screensaver would run it up as well. That's why I stopped using the fish screensaver. I do not run air conditioning, so on very hot days, the screen saver was setting off temp alarms.

This is without Thermal Paste which will be done this weekend.

Meanwhile, I have pointed some additonal fans at it.

Every working computer must be improved .... or replaced ...<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by Jeff68005 on 07/13/02 06:09 AM.</EM></FONT></P>
July 13, 2002 2:55:21 PM

The scores look good, but the temperatures are rather high. Is it stable? Is that with the stock intel heatsink?

- JW
July 13, 2002 7:18:45 PM

<< The scores look good, but the temperatures are rather high. Is it stable? Is that with the stock intel heatsink? >>

It's a OEM chip with a double fan on heatsink for a cooler. Each fan takes up a 3 pin post. That way if a fan dies, I get some redundancy support.

It seems stable but I am getting more IE errors and it has rebooted a time or too. Both could be temp related or the fact that I didn't reinstall my OP systems.

Every working computer must be improved .... or replaced ...
July 13, 2002 9:18:43 PM

You don't need to re-install an OS with a CPU change. I'm surprised your system runs stable at those temps - I'd try to get them down as soon as possible. How hot did your other processor run?

- JW
July 14, 2002 3:25:28 AM

Thank your for your kind attention and comments.

The 700 averaged 156 F on the BIOS screen compared to 175 for the 933 when I posted this query. Now that number is about 100 F for the 933B.

I added some 25% silver CPU heatsink goop careful not to over do it. I also reworked the airway that the CPU fans draw air from. I removed one unsed EIDE cable and changed the flat floppy cable to a round one. I found a way to blow outside room temp air into the tower over the MB closeer to the CPU fans.
Case temp seems about the same. CPU temp dropped to about 46-48 C using the same measurement device on the CPU/MB as before. Temps are while IE6 and the Cancer number cruncer is running.

CPU Fan #1 dropped speed about 2000 and CPU Fan #2 increased about the same speed. Go figure. They still average about (4800-5000) and (5100-5200) RPM each.

Every working computer must be improved .... or replaced ...
July 14, 2002 5:40:50 AM

Those temps are about average.

- JW
!