Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

From 700 to 2400? I want one..!!

Tags:
Last response: in CPUs
Share
October 28, 2002 7:43:08 PM

I have a 700Mhz Duron Processor. I play a lot of games on my comp, and lately I cant play the newest games on high resolutions anymore.
My plan was to get a Athlon at around 1800-2000 XP.
Well, I dont have the money...!

Now I hear something about BIOS updates. My Motherboard supports up to 950Mhz. Says so in the Booklet.
With an Update I could run much higher CPU speeds.
This friend of my tells me I could run 2400XP's on my board.
That sounds a little high, but it would be extremely good if I could run...lets say an Athlon XP 1600 or something on it...

My motherboard is a Chaintech 7AJA-100. It says that the board supports 950Mhz, and ABOVE...
So how does this Bios Update work?

More about : 700 2400

October 28, 2002 8:44:34 PM

What's the chipset?

--
I guess I just see the world from a fisheye. -Eden
October 28, 2002 8:51:34 PM

Not sure what ure asking.
Does this help?

CPU INFO
CENTRAL PROCESSING UNITS
Manufacturer AMD
Family Duron(tm)
Internal Clock 795 MHz
Internal Clock Maximum 795 MHz
External Clock 114 MHz
Socket Designation Slot A
Type <unknown>
Upgrade Slot 1
Capabilities MMX, CMov, RDTSC, 3DNow!, Extended 3DNow!
Version AMD Duron(TM)
CPUID 0x00000631

Or do you want info on my MB ?
Related resources
October 28, 2002 8:58:14 PM

Heh, yeah for the MB, sorry had you go search for that!

Hm...your system clock is weird, did you overclock your system to a 114MHZ bus?

--
I guess I just see the world from a fisheye. -Eden
a b à CPUs
October 28, 2002 9:03:14 PM

No, you cannot run any kind of XP processor at the proper speed, your chipset doesn't support the proper bus speed. The fastest you can use is the 1400 with 100MHz bus (DDR200 bus). Even the 1400 with 133 bus (DDR266) wouldn't run at full speed, unless you unlocked the multiplier.

<font color=blue>You're posting in a forum with class. It may be third class, but it's still class!</font color=blue>
October 28, 2002 9:03:26 PM

Well, I dont know where to see that. Lemme do my best.
There is a little sticker on my MB that says:

7AJA0\100-E100A
UA9955-2 V4.0
09/19/2000 4807
October 28, 2002 9:06:42 PM

Damn. I guess thats because of the big change from a below 1Ghz to an XP system. I guess I'll have to get a new motherboard then.
October 28, 2002 9:10:11 PM

I think your motherboard is a slot motherboard and the 950Mhz Duron is the fastest slot CPU u can get. And slot CPU's will be quite hard to find nowadays.

Correct me if I'm wrong abot anything.

Why use windows when you can use doors?
October 28, 2002 9:16:32 PM

If by slot you mean the CPU's that look like a huge RAM chip, as in the Pentium 3's, nope its not.
I have a flat one.
October 28, 2002 11:00:00 PM

If his CPU is Duron, it's not SLOT A (Athlon only).

:smile: Good or Bad have no meaning at all, depends on what your point of view is.
a b à CPUs
October 28, 2002 11:18:49 PM

No, it's because the chipset was defective. Originally intended to run at 133MHz bus speed (DDR266), it wouldn't. But it could run the memory at that speed, so they kept the name KT133. VIA corrected this design problem and released the KT133A chipset soon afterward, which CAN run XP processors. Heck, you can't even run the 133MHz bus version of the Athlon 1000 at full speed (unless you unlock the multiplier), you would need the 100MHz bus version instead. Not much to do with age, just a crappy chipset.

<font color=blue>You're posting in a forum with class. It may be third class, but it's still class!</font color=blue>
October 29, 2002 3:57:21 PM

Hey the BX can only run at 100 FSB, that must be crappy too eh.....

J/K Crash, I know how much you like that chipset :D 

My sig's faster than yours, and it overclocks better too....
a b à CPUs
October 29, 2002 5:54:16 PM

Haha, the BX can run WELL OVER 150MHz, even though it was designed for 100MHz. And the KT133 can't even run 133MHz, even though it was intended to!

So what we have here is a comparison of a chipset that exceeds it's design spec (BX) compared to a chipset that can't even meet it's design spec (KT133). And the fact that the much OLDER chipset actually clocks much higher than the much newer chipset. Heck, if you want to nit pick, even the crappy Apollo Pro could run 133MHz, it's made by the same company as the crappy KT133, and it's older also! Sounds like the KT133 was simply a failure, even by VIA standards. Yet it was a success in the market place, only because of the limited options available for Athlons at the time.

<font color=blue>You're posting in a forum with class. It may be third class, but it's still class!</font color=blue>
October 30, 2002 12:57:49 AM

Geez you're making me regret trading-in my old P2 system with the i440BX... :frown:

--
I guess I just see the world from a fisheye. -Eden
a b à CPUs
October 30, 2002 1:54:51 AM

LOL, not all BX boards were adjustable. And the PIII never really was cheap. And the PII was SO badly outdated. But you could have kept it as an ultra reliable backup system.

<font color=blue>You're posting in a forum with class. It may be third class, but it's still class!</font color=blue>
October 30, 2002 5:53:39 AM

Get a 1600xp for $53. Watch <A HREF="http://www.tomshardware.com/column/01q4/011124/index.ht..." target="_new">Second THG Video: Unlocking The Athlon XP/MP.</A>. Learn how to do further modifications if your board doesn't support multiplier adjustment. Set multiplier 12.5. Set FSB to 115. Most crappy boards will do at least 115 and PCI of 38 isn't that bad. 1427mhz ~ xp1600. Should be close to heat and speed of normal xp1600.

Recursion - I curse then I recurse again and again
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
October 30, 2002 9:03:55 PM

Do yourself a favor, and get a ECS K7S5A for little more than $50. It will take your SDRAM and will run any Ahlon XP. Upgrade to DDR Ram later if you feel the need. I wouldnt bother with underclocking an Athlon XP, or trying to unlock it, especially with the crappy motherboard you have now. Its not worth the trouble, the risk, and the chances of instability because of the overclock. Besides, Im not sure you'll find a BIOS for that board that supports the Athlon XP at all(wouldnt make sense, since all AXPs require a 133/266 fsb). $55 is small price to pay for running everything in spec, not having to try to unlock your cpu, getting "maximum" performance out of your new cpu, and still have an upgrade path (a good chance you'll be able to drop in a 3000+ Barton one day). Besides, $55 for the motherboard and $52 for the cpu (XP1600), that is one major upgrade for not even $110 !


Other question, what graphic card do you have ? If you have a TNT2 or something, just a new cpu/mb wont do it.


= The views stated herein are my personal views, and not necessarily the views of my wife. =
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
October 30, 2002 9:10:55 PM

Here is a good link for you:
<A HREF="http://www.aceshardware.com/read.jsp?id=45000228" target="_new"> Aces AXP test & upgrade advice </A>
Neatly matches your situation. I think its fair to say the ECS board I suggested performs on par with a KT266, although Aces didnt test with SDRAM (which I suppose you have).

= The views stated herein are my personal views, and not necessarily the views of my wife. =
October 30, 2002 10:04:35 PM

yes i think the ECS board would be a wise investment. I have built several systems with it without problems, though i DO NOT recommend getting it if you want to overclock.

<font color=blue> If it ain't broke, don't fix it...tweak it.</font color=blue>
October 31, 2002 12:18:01 AM

From what I heard, the ECS lower end models have trouble clocking higher due to voltage issues. I'd get KT266A boards or higher from them.

--
The worst of enemies shall be prone to later be the best of friends. -Eden
October 31, 2002 7:07:23 AM

Well, I have a GeForece 2 MX 440 64MB. I'm upgrading that too :tongue:
October 31, 2002 7:58:36 PM

what do you mean by higher?
Most of the systems i have built with the K7S5A were Duron based, but my friend runs an 1800+ just fine. However, I'm not sure how it would handle a 2400+, but I would assume it could handle all the 266FSB chips.

<font color=blue> If it ain't broke, don't fix it...tweak it.</font color=blue>
November 1, 2002 1:47:15 AM

I remember many people having power problems when attempting to use CPUs over 1.4GHZ on these boards, seems there was some problem with the regulators.
I still would recommend an ECS board, but it has to be KT266A or above, not a K7S5A, the suspect of this problem.

--
The worst of enemies shall be prone to later be the best of friends. -Eden
November 1, 2002 2:00:44 AM

Im not trying to argue, but i don't remember hearing about that. You wouldn't happen to have a link would you?

<font color=blue> If it ain't broke, don't fix it...tweak it.</font color=blue>
November 1, 2002 7:21:59 AM

IF you are strapped for $$ but want a board you can grow in the future, look at Giga-byte's GA-8SG667. You will need to use the AGP and PCI slots as some features are not built in, but it will handle any P4 or DDR memory stick currently on the market.
XP CPUs do have some advantages, but heat is not one of them. You can just about fry eggs with them. My P4 2.4 gig 533 FSB CPU runs "Normally" at about 30 degrees Celcius. When I run it at 100 percent, that temps are only about 50 degrees Celcius and return to just above "Normal" in a matter of seconds after I complete my 100 percent processing.

Every working computer must be improved .... or replaced ...<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by Jeff68005 on 11/01/02 04:24 AM.</EM></FONT></P>
November 1, 2002 10:47:36 AM

To be honest, no, however the issues were posted in this forum, and many testified with proof that it had a background history of that problem.

--
The worst of enemies shall be prone to later be the best of friends. -Eden
November 5, 2002 9:52:35 AM

Well. The K7S5A usnt for sale here anymore. Now they have the K7S6A. I guess its the newer version.

Is it as good as the old one, or hands off?
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
November 5, 2002 10:08:13 AM

>Now they have the K7S6A

Its newer and "better" in the sense it offers marginally better performance, because it support 333 Mhz memory. BUT, very big BUT in your case, the K7S6A does not support SDRAM anymore; DDR only. Which means you'd have to upgrade your RAM as well.. i'd look a bit harder for a K7S5A, Im sure you'll find one.

On a side note, I just had a lengthy discussion at Aces over ECS. The thing is, I just ordered a K7S6A, only to find it dead on arrival. RMA'd it, got a new one, and it was DOA AGAIN (no, I didnt screw up, I know how to build a pc.. but I ended up with an Asus board as I had no time to wait for a third ECS one). I've read on numerous forums, including this (Matisaro ? are you reading ?) of people getting DOA boards from ECS. On the other hand, if they work, they are mostly troublefree, stable, fast, cheap. Over at Aces, when I posted my double DOA, I immediately got several reaction of lots of PC builders that had build several, some even dozens of PC's with the K7S5A and K7S6A, all without any issue at all. Make of it what you want, but Im becomming reluctant to recommend ECS, unless RMA-ing doesnt scare you one bit.

= The views stated herein are my personal views, and not necessarily the views of my wife. =
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
November 5, 2002 10:16:04 AM

I should also add my previous board was an ECS K7S5A, which had served me absolutely perfectly for the last 1,5 years. No issues whatsoever, besides its rather picky on the PSU. I do have a loaded machine though (back then 1.4 Tbird, 3x7200 rpm harddisks, CDRW/DVD, 5 PCI cards, Geforce4 Ti, lots of fans, etc, etc), so my Enermax 350W wasnt up to it. It took a 450W to get it 100% stable.. Once I had that PSU, I dont think I really *ever* had a blue screen of death, or lockups, or anything.

= The views stated herein are my personal views, and not necessarily the views of my wife. =
November 17, 2002 1:53:12 PM

Quote:
On a side note, I just had a lengthy discussion at Aces over ECS. The thing is, I just ordered a K7S6A, only to find it dead on arrival. RMA'd it, got a new one, and it was DOA AGAIN (no, I didnt screw up, I know how to build a pc.. but I ended up with an Asus board as I had no time to wait for a third ECS one). I've read on numerous forums, including this (Matisaro ? are you reading ?) of people getting DOA boards from ECS. On the other hand, if they work, they are mostly troublefree, stable, fast, cheap.


Ive come to the conclusion that ecs boards all suck for the first 4 months of their life, the k7s5a initial runs were terrible(5 doas in a row for me) then they cleared up to the point of me being able to reccomend tham as good cheap boards, i havent been keeping up with ecs devlopments recently, but from what i gather generally the new boards are sucking big ones, alas, they are so cheap and if they had good qc they would be a killer buy.

:wink: Heatsinks, if you dont overclock, use the <b>STOCK!</b> :wink:
November 17, 2002 5:48:00 PM

Quote:
LOL, not all BX boards were adjustable. And the PIII never really was cheap. And the PII was SO badly outdated. But you could have kept it as an ultra reliable backup system.


my PII 400Mhz on a BX chipset (Asus P2B mobo) is still going strong..bit slow now, but it's been fine for a few years, and a great back up if i fry my palomino :) 
a b à CPUs
November 17, 2002 6:42:37 PM

There is another side to this issue, that is that even in the used market a PIII 1000 system is still worth around $120 more than a PII 400 system. Now if you were to sell the 400 after installing the 1000, you'd end up bux up if you sell the system. Or you could simply extend the usefullness of the system as a backup. Compgeeks sells the 1000E Slot 1 100MHz processor retail boxed for around $100.

<font color=blue>You're posting in a forum with class. It may be third class, but it's still class!</font color=blue>
November 17, 2002 7:01:18 PM

that is interesting, if i put my GF2 Ultra in there (it's unused since i got a Ti 4200) and threw out the old Matrox Millenium 8Mb then boosted the main system with an extra stick of PC100 RAM (can the Asus P2B take a 256Mb stick?) and put in the PIII 1Ghz, then it's quite a strong system then....could get some good money for it. cheers crash
a b à CPUs
November 17, 2002 7:20:28 PM

Yes, the board supports 256MB/slot of PC133/100/66. But you need to follow the density rules I laid out in the little part of the Memory FAQ I wrote.

<font color=blue>You're posting in a forum with class. It may be third class, but it's still class!</font color=blue>
November 17, 2002 7:49:31 PM

You would probably be well advised not to put an XP in that motherboard. It is too old for one to run an XP at the correct clock speed. My personal nightmare happened when trying to upgrade a friends computer from a thunderbird 1.2gig to an XP 1600+ I did my home work even checking that the motherboard could support the XP at the manufacturers website and downloading the latest Bios. As it turned out the board couldn't run the morgan or palomino cores stably (Duron 1gig upwards and XP) it turned out to be a revision 1! rev 2 and 3 could as they had subtle changes in their circuitry otherwise they were identical, this motherboard was a lot more modern than yours. You would probably be best getting a Thunderbird 1.4gig it is still very powerful and can well outperform the highest Duron around as well as being cheaper in price (make sure its a 200 FSB one though not a 266)!
!