Can anybody tell me what the Best CPU I can put into my Gigabyte GA-6ZXC rev 2.0?

Right now it is running a Celeron 433, 192Mb SDram, and a geforce2mx 32mb (win98se OS).

I use it as a secondary Computer, but its still able to run a few of the newer games (MOH:AA, C&C:renegade, CS, etc). Depending on what CPU it can take, and if the performance boost is big enough, I figure why not drop the $50 - $100 (cdn) into it.

Thanks in advance

Check out the Gigabyte website. They have <A HREF="http://tw.giga-byte.com/products/ga6zxc.htm" target="_new">this page</A> on their site with your mobo specs.

You've got a ZX based board, which is the same as a BX except it only supports 512mb of ram and only the first four PCI slots are busmastered.

The rev 2.0 looks to me like it's a Coppermine (VRM 8.4) capable board (with BIOS "F1" or later) according to [babelfish]<A HREF="http://www.gigabyte.ru/home/cumine.htm" target="_new">this</A>[/babelfish] Gigabyte page.

<A HREF="http://homepages.picknowl.com.au/warrantytech/p3br.html" target="_new">This</A> page says you need BIOS "1.3" (Sep. 23, 1999)

Anyways, it's safe to say that with the latest BIOS you can run Coppermine chips. <A HREF="http://www.gigabyte.co.jp/support/temp/6zxc_f2.zip" target="_new">Here's a link to the F2 BIOS dated Feb. 5, 2001</A> which is the latest I can find.

You've got a few options open to you. You could look for a used Coppermine PIII, or try a Tualatin Celeron in a slocket. The F2 BIOS will not have Tualatin microcode (since it's dated Feb 2001) so Tualatins may or may not work. If you want a bit of a challenge you can add Tualatin microcode to the F2 BIOS, but I'm not sure how much effort you want to put into it. I can tell you from experience that a Tualeron 1.2 @ 1.6 (133FSB) is a decent performer.

*Dual PIII-800 @900 i440BX and Tualeron 1.2 @1.74 i815*

I would recommend the 1Ghz Coppermine rather than the Tualatin as it's still way too expensive for the performance you get and are hard to find.

You'll need a Slot->Socket converter though.

<font color=green>THG's reviews are the key to become a computer hardware pro!!!</font color=green>

A Tualatin Celeron 1.2 @1.6 (133FSB) is cheaper, easier to find, and considerably faster then both a PIII Coppermine 700E @933 (133FSB) and a PIII Coppermine 1000EB @1000 (133FSB).

*Dual PIII-800 @900 i440BX and Tualeron 1.2 @1.74 i815*

If so, the website for GA-6ZXC didn't even mention a thing about Tualatins.

BTW, if BX/ZX can use Tualatins, why was i815EP even made?

<font color=green>THG's reviews are the key to become a computer hardware pro!!!</font color=green>

It definitely won't support them natively. It _might_ support them on an adapter slocket.

The first i815EP didn't support Tualatins either. intel released a B stepping that did when the Tualatins came out.

[edit]The reason i815 was made (apart from to pick up the i820 pieces) was to support a 133FSB, AGP 4x, and ATA-100.[/edit]

You can pin mod the Tualatin chips to make them run on a BX or i815 (or ZX or any other chipset that will run a coppermine) but the adapters are so cheap now it's easier to just buy one.

*Dual PIII-800 @900 i440BX and Tualeron 1.2 @1.74 i815*<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by JCLW on 12/03/02 06:14 PM.</EM></FONT></P>

I am not sure if this adaptor will work or not, it's called PL-iP3/T Tualatin CPU Convertor from PowerLeap.

<A HREF="http://www.powerleap.com" target="_new">http://www.powerleap.com</A>

<font color=green>THG's reviews are the key to become a computer hardware pro!!!</font color=green>

NO, THE CELERON 1.2GHZ IS CONSIDERABLY SLOWER THAN A 700@933, I KNOW BECAUSE I OWNNED BOTH AND TESTED THEM MYSELF. IN FACT, THE 1.2GHZ OVERCLOCKED TO 1480MHZ WAS STILL A TICK SLOWER THAN MY 700@933. I WAS SO DISGUSTED I SOLD IT AT A LOSS!!!

<font color=blue>You're posting in a forum with class. It may be third class, but it's still class!</font color=blue>

I'm selling one for $40.

<font color=blue>You're posting in a forum with class. It may be third class, but it's still class!</font color=blue>

I know you don't agree with me, but honnestly at stock speeds I find my Celeron 1.2 as fast as a 933/1000EB. At 1.6 there is no comparison - it feels both smoother when multitasking and considerably faster when number crunching.

<A HREF="http://www.tomshardware.com/cpu/01q4/011003/index.html" target="_new">Tom's benchmarks</A>
<A HREF="http://www.xbitlabs.com/cpu/celeron-1200/" target="_new">X-bit labs benchmarks</A>

If you'd like I'll run any benchmark you pick on my Celery 1.2

I don't know what else to say. I think the Celeron 1.2 is faster.

Poor Ub3r_n00b must think we're all nuts.

*Dual PIII-800 @900 i440BX and Tualeron 1.2 @1.74 i815*

Thanks for the proof! PIII 1000EB (which is what I have now) QIII over 10% faster than Celeron 1200, Dronez ~4% better, Evolva ~10% better, 3D-Mark 2001 ~100pts better, then it flops over in the Sisoft benchmarks (which I feel have no bearing on real programs). My experience was a little better with the PIII, not that much, but notable (meh PIII@933 did about 10% better in game benchmarks than my stock 1200, and about 1% better than my overclocked 1200). But since half the problem with the Tualatins is bus speed, I've decided to make another run at it with a 1GHz CPU that should allow me to use higher bus speeds.

<font color=blue>You're posting in a forum with class. It may be third class, but it's still class!</font color=blue>

nooo.... I don't think your all nuts. In fact, its nice to see this much discussion and debate over a simple question, it helps me (and everybody else) get as much info as possible.

In most other hardware forums, you're lucky to get an answer at all ( I mean besides "stfu." )

<font color=red> Remember, there is no such thing as a stupid question... just stupid people. </font color=red>

True, the 1000EB was faster in games, but the Celeron was:

7~8% faster in Sysmark 2001
8~11% faster in Sysmark 2001 internet content creation
6% faster in Sysmark 2001 office productivity
19% faster in CineBench Raytracing
11% faster in Business Winstone 2001
3% faster in Content creation Winstone 2001

all of which are basically synthetic benchmarks, but:

12% faster in WinZIP 8.0
4% faster at DivX encoding
17% faster at Science Mark

- JW

*Dual PIII-800 @900 i440BX and Tualeron 1.2 @1.74 i815*

Whew... I thought we'ed scared you away.

Crashman: The newer cores o/c much better. My dad has a 1.0 tA1 that's run at 1333 in a file server (default voltage and stock cooling @7v) 24/7 for 3 months, and most tB1 cores will do 1700 with decent air-cooling if you can find one. The tB1s are harder to find then C1 P4s at the moment 'tho.

You _really_ want one with an sSpec that starts with SL6. The SL5s are nowhere near as good.

- JW

*Dual PIII-800 @900 i440BX and Tualeron 1.2 @1.74 i815*

I still would recommend the 1Ghz EB P3 simply because you won't even need to take chances whether it'll work or not and as far as I'm concerned, I would rather agree with Crashman as 3D stuff shows the CPU's true FPU power which is the most important part of a CPU.

<font color=green>THG's reviews are the key to become a computer hardware pro!!!</font color=green>

The only application I wanted more speed in was games though, so I could play them with more detail, at higher resolution. Which is why I only benchmarked with games. Also I noticed my gameplay was smoother at the higher settings. I was pushing the settings for my games as high as I could while maintaining smooth gameplay, then installing the Celeron to compare, was upset to see more stalls (missing frames).

<font color=blue>You're posting in a forum with class. It may be third class, but it's still class!</font color=blue>