|
rscott posted:Tualatin wasn't officially supported on 440BX but I had an Abit BH6 that had no problem running up to 150MHz. Basically the only reason I went from 440BX to 815 was my Radeon 8500 couldn't tolerate the overclocked AGP bus like my old GeForce 2 did. Yeah, and there were factory 440BX boards with made expressly for a 133 FSB, with the right multipliers to keep AGP/PCI speeds correct. I had an MSI BX-Master like this - still have it, somewhere. Alereon posted:
gently caress VIA and gently caress that MOTHERFUCKING SHITSUCKING ASSDILDO of a chipset, those goddamn Apollo Pros had the IDE transfer rate of a sedated snail, a total inability to be stable using a Sound Blaster card, and general instability under heavy multitasking when you were hitting the HD. People everywhere bitched for years about it, VIA kept releasing new 4-in-1's that did absolutely nothing but give me temporary hope. Christ, that stupid chipset gave more hassles than any computer hardware I ever used, before or since. I had a dual-proc P-III/933 box that should have been the cat's meow, but that goddamn chipset was a constant thorn in my side. And gently caress Intel, too, I didn't have $1000 to buy an 820 or 840 board and RDRAM.
|
#
¿
Sep 23, 2010 06:01
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 25, 2024 08:20 |
|
|
Tab8715 posted:What the hell is the other 80? C2Ds? Old-school i3/i5/i7's, I'd imagine.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 12, 2010 00:23
|
|
|
Going back to the Pentium D discussion, I tried to replace the dog-slow Pentium D 2.8 in my GF's Dell Dimension(loving BTX grrr) with an E6600 C2D and it was a no- go. It SHOULD have worked, being a 945 chipset and all, but Dell must have BIOS-locked the drat thing. An E2180 didn't work either, so I dug deep into my box of obsolete processors and stuck a P-D945 (3.4ghz) in it, which is a wonderful room heater but still amazingly sluggish considering it's clock speed. I highly recommend not spending a nickel on anything Netburst- related. Vvvvvv For six bucks, I'd have probably done the same, I like upgrading old poo poo myself, but the results were so disappointing 
JnnyThndrs fucked around with this message at 18:32 on Apr 20, 2014 |
|
#
¿
Apr 20, 2014 16:25
|
|
|
Alereon posted:IWhen you consider how painfully slow those CPUs are even at basic web browsing and the ready availability of Core 2 Duo machines destined for the recycler it just doesn't make any sense to still have Netburst-based machines sitting around wasting power. See, that's the thing, I can understand the chip being slow at number-crunching and other hardcore CPU-intensive tasks, but it's just so slow at simple stuff like web browsing. I put a modern 500gb SATA hd in it, bumped the RAM to 2gb of ddr2(plenty for XP) and chucked in a Radeon 5650 and nothing helped, it's intrinsic to the processor/architecture.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 20, 2014 18:25
|
|
|
Looks just like my 6-core-w/HT Xeon except a couple guys short. Occasionally Core 10 will get a wild hair up its rear end and do all the work for awhile.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 14, 2015 17:02
|
|
|
I like the LGA setup, personally, because removal of the HSF won't yank the drat chip out of the socket half the time.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 19, 2015 04:31
|
|
|
NarDmw posted:I am in a similar situation with a i7 930, and found out that buying a used hexacore xeon x5670 (any xeon 5600 series chip really) for $75 can work. I can retain my motherboard, ram and have a Sandy Bridge equivalent chip (with overclock) for a cheap upgrade to hold me out for a little longer. It is worth looking into. Does anyone else have experience with upgrading a nehalem Bloomfield to a xeon westmere-ep? Yeah, I did exactly what you did - tossed an old 920 and bought a X5670 Westmere Xeon, then threw a 212 Evo cooler on it and bumped it to 3.55ghz. It's still down a bit on per-core performance compared to my 2500k or 3570k machines, but I just wanted 12 threads to play with and only have a couple hundred bucks in the mobo/proc/HSF. The Westmere Xeons are on 32nm fab rather than the 45nm process of the 920, so power draw isn't much more than the quad-core.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 11, 2015 00:37
|
|
|
NarDmw posted:Did you find that to be a useful/good value upgrade that allowed you to game at 1080p? I did -some- gaming with that machine, but it's only got a GTX580, and I have a 1440p monitor, so it's always older games and/or lower settings. I mainly use it as a Hackintosh and video encoding box. However, the improvement over the 920 was immediately felt in pretty much everything - partly the overclock, but the extra two cores surely help in video encoding. I spent $100 for the chip and cooler, and I feel it was well worth it. A Sandy Bridge K-chip is still probably faster in gaming, though, since you can easily get a much higher overclock and SB is faster in per-core performance. I might use this setup to play with VM's when I build my next machine, the six cores would be perfect, just have to throw another 12gig of RAM in it.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 11, 2015 03:24
|
|
|
Don Lapre posted:Yea, ive installed thousands of them and seen plenty machines come back over the years but never for a bad intel fan. Even in the dirtiest of environments. Exactly - I've only serviced a few hundred machines over the last ten years, but they're generally pretty dust-filled and poorly maintained, and I've seen -one- OEM Intel fan die. It was on a 3.4 Pentium D, so that poor bastard was absolutely screaming, I assume 
|
|
#
¿
Aug 15, 2015 00:10
|
|
|
I'd tend to believe the ARK, especially since Devil's Canyon "K" chips do vt-d
|
|
#
¿
Jan 3, 2016 16:46
|
|
|
Swartz posted:
Sure, I'll take a gamble - johndmietz@aol.com to set up payment, or PM me 
|
|
#
¿
Apr 18, 2016 17:51
|
|
|
212 Evo is way quieter than the stock Intel unit, especially when the fans ramp up.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 29, 2016 19:26
|
|
|
Yeah, the stock cooler is adequate -sorta- for stock clocks on a 4790k, but I would never overclock with it. Not when an Evo 212 is $29 or less.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 30, 2016 00:41
|
|
|
I believe Asrock was once the lower-end subsidiary of ASUS, but they were spun off into their own company some years ago.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 21, 2016 05:49
|
|
|
DildenAnders posted:Hey i have a core i7 860 (generation 2 i believe) that works but the ram slots of the machine i was using all died. Does anyone have recommendations for a new Motherboard thats cheap and could handle that processor along with a A GPU and wireless card? ultimately id like to run Dolphin emulator on this machine, if that helps. Im not too knowlegable with this stuff so any help would be appreciated. That's an LGA1156 socket processor, and they haven't made new motherboards with that socket in ~5 years, so to keep it, you'd have to look at Craigslist/Ebay/SA-mart. I'd probably try to find a newer chip/mobo combo, that 860 is far slower than any i7 made since SandyBridge came out in 2011.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 28, 2016 03:58
|
|
|
DildenAnders posted:I appreciate the help, but i dont exactly have the money to get a new one. I reall cant spend more than $60 Okay, there's a slew of micro-ATX boards on fleabay for around $50, and full ATX boards for about $75 if you need all the extra slots. Some of the mATX boards are Intel, which tend to be pretty reliable/stable, even if they aren't useful for overclocking.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 28, 2016 04:22
|
|
|
DildenAnders posted:Yeah i dont think im going to be overclocking. Ive never installed a CPU before, is it difficult? Not really, the only really critical part is carefully/gently dropping the CPU into the socket so that no pins are damaged(they're in the socket, not the processor nowadays) and making sure the orientation of the chip is correct(it's square, so theoretically there are three wrong and one correct way to put it in). There are notches on the sides that will line up when it's correct, and I'm sure there's YouTube guides on how to get it right that will be more helpful than I am. Also, the stock Intel heat sinks can be a pain because of the twist-pins, but again, there are visual guides galore online. LinusTechTips has one for your exact CPU on the first page of Google when you search for "how to install an Intel CPU"
|
|
#
¿
Aug 28, 2016 05:05
|
|
|
Combat Pretzel posted:Ah the Coppermine, that was my second dual processor rig. Thing outlasted and -performed a lot of Pentium 4s in non-gaming tasks. Intel stopped supporting multiprocessing in consumer CPUs after that. I sat it out a long while until AMD started with the dual cores. Same here, I ran my dual-PIII-850 box until AMD socket 939 came out. I also had a 1.4@1.7 Tualitin P-3 gaming rig that poo poo all over P-4's for years until the 3.0 P-4's came out, and those things were furnaces. gently caress Netburst, forever.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 6, 2016 17:50
|
|
|
EdEddnEddy posted:I actually have a old LGA775 ASROCK board here I got years ago for SnG to play with some old hardware as it has slots for DDR1 and DDR2 ram, and a AGP and PCI-E slots. It's not going to be anything fast compared to a good LGA775 board, but I feel it would be fun to play around with some old GPU's and stuff to see the performance difference between AGP/PCI-E of the same card or just nostalgically going back and seeing how gaming was on older hardware or something. I've got a couple of those boards too, I got 'em cheap so I could run my AGP Radeon X800 All-In-Wonder for HTPC duties, since I paid $450 for it in like 2005. Worked well until I retired that setup in favor of something that could deal with digital signals and HD.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 9, 2016 04:10
|
|
|
BIG HEADLINE posted:Only ASRock ever made an ITX X99 board, and damned if it isn't the busiest board I've ever seen: I am the external sideways CMOS battery that's pretending it's 1989 again. Edit: isn't restricting x99 to dual-channel RAM kinda gimping the platform, or is it not a big deal, performance-wise?
|
|
#
¿
Nov 16, 2016 14:21
|
|
|
sincx posted:Sigh. It's a bit sad that we are at a point when money can no longer buy significant CPU performance improvements even after waiting years and years for an upgrade. Well, you kinda -can-, by switching to the HEDT platform, but you still won't get any better single-threaded performance. It's a double-edged sword, your existing hardware holds its value much better and there's no pressing need to upgrade, but sucks if you like buying and playing with shiny new toys.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 25, 2016 16:57
|
|
|
Harik posted:Anything that separates out a RAM benchmark so I can tell if I have a problem? I believe CPU-Z will give you accurate readings on your RAM timings/speeds
|
|
#
¿
Dec 12, 2016 13:53
|
|
|
Paul MaudDib posted:Interesting, I hadn't thought about the legacy hardware approach for SATA. I didn't even know there were SATA cards in 1998, it would be something like another 10 years before I got a SATA drive. But yeah, if you're still running Windows 98 then you have a real good reason for doing it. I managed to get my AHA-2940 and 2940UW cards working OK on WIn10x64 by disabling driver enforcement, so my old weird removable drives still work. Hopefully something like Hamrick Vuescan could get your scanner working under Win10.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 4, 2017 07:12
|
|
|
Paul MaudDib posted:So what you're saying is... I can boot Win3.1 and use my USB 3.0 hard drive at full speed? Theoretically. I tried to get USB working on my old DOS/WIn3.11 retro box a couple years ago and eventually gave up - and I don't give up easily. Part of the issue that I ran into is that by the time I allocated resources with the autoexec.bat/config.sys for network, sound card, and SCSI card, there wasn't any left for USB. Also, IIRC, it took a ton of low memory for the TSR's to run that monitored the ports which screwed up a bunch of programs, and I couldn't get them to load high. I probably could have gone with the 'custom autoexec/config files just for USB' trick, but I didn't need USB that badly. ....gently caress, that's the most 1993 poo poo I've ever written :/ <edit> judging from Fishmech's post, they've improved the USB stack dramatically, there was no 'package' when I tried it, just a bunch of poo poo I had to manually install. Calmira looks better too, I use an older version of it and it's a little buggy. JnnyThndrs fucked around with this message at 17:39 on Feb 4, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Feb 4, 2017 17:34
|
|
|
redeyes posted:I remember VIA being the worst AMD chipsets ever. Goddamn things were incredibly unstable. Their Intel chipsets were no better. I fought with a Via Apollo 694A dual-socket mobo for the better part of two years that would occasionally spontaneously reboot when you loaded both IDE channels at the same time, and their Sound Blaster bug was well-known. And their super-7 poo poo was even worse, but all super-7 poo poo was bad, so 
|
|
#
¿
Feb 7, 2017 14:07
|
|
|
poo poo, just replace the cap, they're super cheap to buy new and usually easy to solder. I did a couple hundred of them back in the cap-plague days when everybody's board died, and all I had was a 5$ soldering iron, a roll of desoldering wick and nothing to lose. I think every board I fixed ended up working when I was done, the caps blowing didn't seem to bother anything else.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 15, 2017 13:20
|
|
|
BobHoward posted:I think they were talking about 14.31818 MHz, which was a clock frequency needed by NTSC TV sets. Since quartz oscillators and crystals cut for that frequency were so common, they were very cheap. Lots of designs with no need to be NTSC compatible used that frequency (or ran it through a simple divider to generate a slower frequency) just because it was lots cheaper than picking anything else. Holy poo poo, I always wondered why those crystals were so common in all kinds of poo poo that had nothing to do with TV's. 
|
|
#
¿
Feb 21, 2017 18:34
|
|
|
gently caress, I dunno, I've used Gigabyte midrange boards almost exclusively since the C2Quad 6600 days because I Hackintosh everything(just for the hell if it) and GB boards have always been the gold standard of simplicity for Hackintoshes. Never really had much of an issue with them, either with reliability or overclocking, although I only casually overclock. For my couple of high-end rigs, it's always ASUS, though. I beat the hell out of them and they just keep hangin' in there.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 23, 2017 15:53
|
|
|
Rexxed posted:Gigabyte has done some bait and switch with motherboard revisions: Oh that fuckin' sucks, although tbf, I wouldn't buy a 70$ B85 mobo to do serious poo poo on. But their whole 'endless revision' thing -is- really irritating, they've changed things in later revisions which require different kexts and I've dicked around for hours wondering why my stuff didn't work. I think the gold standard for horrible boards has to be cheap Via-based motherboards from the Super 7 days, long-forgotten names like FIC, Shuttle and Soyo. Iwill was bad too, but I have a soft spot for them because I bought a dual-Slot One 440BX board from them that lasted me like four years(which was an eternity back then), went from dual PII-400's all the way to overclocked PIII-850's. I still have that board, gonna make another retro gaming machine one of these days. Not that Win9x will notice that second processor though.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 24, 2017 14:30
|
|
|
I had a couple of those SIMM/DIMM hybrid boards too, and yeah, you could only use one or the other. I remember reusing old SIMMS until I could afford new DIMM's because memory was so expensive back then. I think I was running a K6-2/400 and later a K6-3/450. Would have been a good setup except for the horrid Via Apollo chipsets.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 25, 2017 13:01
|
|
|
New Zealand can eat me posted:IT Told ya 
|
|
#
¿
Mar 1, 2017 13:57
|
|
|
Combat Pretzel posted:Lead-free solder is the devil. This cannot be stated enough
|
|
#
¿
Mar 2, 2017 01:57
|
|
|
Captain Hair posted:Just performed my first "Xeon 711 cpu to socket 775" mod. I must say it's alot easier than i was expecting. I did it about 18 months ago with a 3.06 Xeon - I took lazy way out and bought a CPU that already had that decal-thing attached, knocked the tab off with a razor and just popped it into the socket. Only hassle is that I couldn't Hackintosh the result, OSX crashed about ten different ways and finally wouldn't boot. Went back to a Q6600 and everything was fine again. In Windows-land, the Xeon worked splendidly, I got it running at 3.4 stable and it's quite noticeably faster.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 18, 2017 15:51
|
|
|
Yeah, when I did mine, a q5500 was about $110 on fleabay and my Xeon was $60 shipped. Plus, I was more interested in 'does this work?' rather than a real need for more speed.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 22, 2017 14:55
|
|
|
I thought the TIM wasn't a factor, since people who delidded still had the temp-spike problem, according to the article?
|
|
#
¿
May 6, 2017 13:16
|
|
|
I would think it's lower than that, my 4790K runs at 1.088 stock. IIRC, they're all a little different, each processor is set for the core voltage it needs to validate properly.
|
|
#
¿
May 29, 2017 01:40
|
|
|
I think the buttcoins de jour are 'Ethereum' now and the miners have bought pretty much every AMD 580 card available anywhere to mine them. IIRC, Ethereum was designed to thwart the use of dedicated ASICS, but I'm no expert(thankfully).
|
|
#
¿
May 29, 2017 17:48
|
|
|
redeyes posted:I've got a 7700k that I got at launch and another I got yesterday. The launch processor does not heatspike when doing things like loading Chrome at all. The recent one jumps from 40 to 80c in the blink of an eye. I am forced to conclude my first 7700k has better thermal goop and/or a smaller gap between the die and the heatspreader. I am actually considering deliding this recent cpu. Goddamnit Intel! I was delaying doing a 7700K build for exactly this reason, and somewhere(maybe here?) I was reading that the procs were still spiking after delidding, and even going direct-to-die with the HSF. Now I'm just gonna go Skylake-X or Ryzen, to hell with only four cores.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 17, 2017 18:49
|
|
|
I have all the modern MS OS's installed between a few different boxes I use regularly and Win8.1 + Startisback is my favorite. Has most of the improvements in 10 but I still have control over updates/reboots(yes, I update regularly).
|
|
#
¿
Jun 22, 2017 05:03
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 25, 2024 08:20 |
|
|
Yeah, Intel hasn't been getting 10% better IPC each generation either - my Haswell Refresh at 4.8 is only about 20% faster than my SB@4.6. Although Skylake probably bumped up more than preceding generations because of DDR4, but then Kaby Lake didn't add anything.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 14, 2017 14:56
|
|