Topic: dual motherboard: decisions, decisions....
started by: hyperponic
. or, on the flip side, i could just go out in the next month or two and put together a nice dual pIII system on top of an abit or MSI board. so...think its worth waiting for the AMDz, or should i go pIII? and, of course, there's the optional choice: that i'm a fucknut for not wanting to build a single-proc system...------------------
It's not peer pressure, its just your turn.
In terms of absolute side by side comparison, it has been my observation that while PIII's are more expensive Mhz for Mhz, PIII systems make up for it in other areas such as stability and fewer compatibility issues, as well as the nice benefit of overclocking. AMD chips perform slightly higher on numbercrunching benchmarks, but PIII's blow them away in multimedia.
Either way, you're not facing a choice between undesirable options, they are both great procs.
Oh, and in my experience, Abit is slightly better than MSI.
My next system is gonna be two of the fastest PIII's or P4's (if they're out) I can lay my hands on, with a Radeon or better gfx card.
------------------
Old farts never die, they just get blown away.
and < abit is better >
------------------
What if there were no hypothetical questions?
------------------
What if there were no hypothetical questions?
------------------
"I didnt know cows had boobs, I just thought they had that big nutsack with all the wieners hanging off it" - Beavis
Metal/Electronic/Ambient etc..
< http://www.mp3.com/fatbitch >
btw, what operating system(s) are you using/planning on using? and while its undoubtedly cool as hell to have a dual proc machine, two 1.2ghz chips do not give you a 2.4ghz computer. depending on the operating system, you may not even be able to take advantage of both processors, and if you can it will probably be something like 100\% from one, and maybe 50\% from the other.
just warning you
speaking of overclocking:
the computer i use the most is a celeron II 566 running at 800 on an abit bx133 raid. same coppermine core as the p3 (the p3's can get up there, especially the 600E from what i have heard), and i know of some people that have gotten them [566] into the 950-1 ghz range... not too bad.. of course i also know people who have their duron 650's running at a gigahertz so its kind of a dumb argument as to which can go higher.
(as soon as i get a watercooling system set up i 'should' be in the 900's, but maybe my chip just wasn't from a good enough silicon batch to be able to. i guess im happy with it. )
edit: changed 600EB to 600E
------------------
If the doors of perception were cleansed everything would appear to man as it is, infinite. - William Blake
This message has been edited by hair on January 07, 2001 at 09:45 PM
Dual processors not only need a compatible OS to take advantage of them (NT, 2000, all of the Unix variants), but the application itself also needs to be designed to use multiple processors. Otherwise the app just runs on one CPU. If you want Photoshop to scream, dual CPU's will be a blessing. If you're looking for a high-speed gaming system, get a single-CPU board with the fastest CPU you can get.
quote:
Originally posted by hair:
the computer i use the most is a celeron II 566 running at 800 on an abit bx133 raid. same coppermine core as the p3 (the p3's can get up there, especially the 600EB from what i have heard)
Quick clarification for you. The coppermine core is common, but I believe that the Celerys have less ondie cache (128?) and you might have trouble getting the 66Mhz FSB up to the 133 range. Also, the 600E is what you are referring to, since the EB means it is running at a 133 FSB, thus making it an 800. The PIII 600E is identical to the 800EB since they have the same multiplier, just different FSB settings (easy to bypass with the right board). I found this out after buying my 800EB, and was pissed at the extra ์ or so that I spent.
Also cool, the Celery 800 is going to have the 100Mhz FSB (finally). Don't know what the ramification of this is, but it's awfully nice.
quote:
Originally posted by askheaves:
Quick clarification for you. The coppermine core is common, but I believe that the Celerys have less ondie cache (128?) and you might have trouble getting the 66Mhz FSB up to the 133 range. Also, the 600E is what you are referring to, since the EB means it is running at a 133 FSB, thus making it an 800. The PIII 600E is identical to the 800EB since they have the same multiplier, just different FSB settings (easy to bypass with the right board). I found this out after buying my 800EB, and was pissed at the extra ์ or so that I spent.
i think you are reading what i said wrong...
its you that needs clarification
my computer that i use the most is a celeron 2 566 overclocked to 800mhz.
the motherboard is an abit bx133 raid (just the name of the mobo not the bus speed)
the reason i talked about the coppermine core is because someone asked if the p3's can overclock well. i do not technically have a p3, but since the core is the same, i was trying to show that, yes, the p3 can overclock.
you are right about the 600E, i was mistaken. i was thinking that the EB was the one with the 100mhz FSB
yes, the celeron 2 has less (128K) of on dye cache than a p3.
quote:
Also cool, the Celery 800 is going to have the 100Mhz FSB (finally). Don't know what the ramification of this is, but it's awfully nice.
unfortunately, this is not cool, since overclocking will be more difficult. it is cool as far as speed though because anytime you increase bus speed you increase the amount of data that can be transferred through in a given amount of time.
edit (if anything i say isn't worded clearly, im sorry, but i was in a hurry)
------------------
If the doors of perception were cleansed everything would appear to man as it is, infinite. - William Blake
This message has been edited by hair on January 07, 2001 at 09:42 PM
quote:
Originally posted by aventari:
I was under the impression that Intel still multiplier locked the processors internally, and there was no way to change the multiplier rate.
Yes, this is true... the multiplier is locked. That is why I was especially pissed off. The PIII 600E is identical to the PIII 800EB.
100Mhz (E) x 6 Multiplier = 600Mhz
133Mhz (EB) x 6 Multiplier = 800Mhz
The control for this differentiation is whatever FSB setting that the motherboard has selected. Grr...
quote:
Originally posted by damien_s_lucifer:
but the application itself also needs to be designed to use multiple processors. Otherwise the app just runs on one CPU. If you want Photoshop to scream, dual CPU's will be a blessing. If you're looking for a high-speed gaming system, get a single-CPU board with the fastest CPU you can get.
Also note though, that you can specify which proc the app uses. So you can perform proc load balancing.
------------------
jim
Beauty is in the eye of the Beer Holder
< Brews and Cues >
quote:
Originally posted by askheaves:
...thus making it an 800. The PIII 600E is identical to the 800EB since they have the same multiplier, just different FSB settings (easy to bypass with the right board). I found this out after buying my 800EB, and was pissed at the extra ์ or so that I spent.
I was under the impression that Intel still multiplier locked the processors internally, and there was no way to change the multiplier rate.
I sure hope i'm wrong though, I'd LOVE to be overclocking a coppermine w/ total clock speed freedom :]
You _can_ unlock AMD multipliers, but only after connecting some traces on the chip, the it's not really the motherboard that does that.
------------------
aventari
"Maintainer's Motto: If we can't fix it, it ain't broke. "
quote:
Originally posted by askheaves:
That is why I was especially pissed off. The PIII 600E is identical to the PIII 800EB.
100Mhz (E) x 6 Multiplier = 600Mhz
133Mhz (EB) x 6 Multiplier = 800Mhz
It's actually not identicle. the core and the multiplier are definately the exact same, but Intel tests the 800's out for 800mhz and the 600's for 600. So there is a guaruntee that the 800's will run for 15 years (or whatever it's rated life is) at 800, while the 600's have been tested at 600, and there might be minor imperfections that keep it from running the higher clock speed.
It's exactly like the difference between a p3-650e and a p3-900e. The core is the same, the only difference is the mhz.
From what i understand the chips are tested in big batches and if they dont work at a high speed, they're tested at lower and lower speeds till they pass
------------------
aventari
"Maintainer's Motto: If we can't fix it, it ain't broke. "