Hey man!, nice one! Although....

To answer your question how to ''turbo it up'', I think there's pretty much nothing you can do...well, except some minor things:

-Be sure to have the best (meaning fastest) memory settings available, PCI latency timer
-Don't use any ISA sound cards, in means of performance, not quality. Suggesting to use USB version of SB16, won't hog your PCI bus.
-Update the BIOS (if available) - possible bug fixes, may add performance.

Other than that, I definitely suggest to get rid of the mobo you're using and get something robust, such as P5S-B or FIC VA-503+, to stay with the case. Of course giving it a superior VGA card, something like radeon 9xxx (your choice) and clock it up to the sky, giving you 112MHz FSB max for the first mobo, 124MHz for the latter one.

I'm going to follow you on the CPU buy, since the guy claims to have thousands and thousands of them, can wait. I'll be using the best of the best mobo (at least I think) with socket7, and that is the Iwill XA100 Plus - after my thorough browsing on the net I figured that this is the only one motherboard that gives you the 140MHz FSB option, making your CPU to go @ 840MHz 😀.

Shodan486 wrote:

Hey man!, nice one! Although.... […]
Show full quote

Hey man!, nice one! Although....

To answer your question how to ''turbo it up'', I think there's pretty much nothing you can do...well, except some minor things:

-Be sure to have the best (meaning fastest) memory settings available, PCI latency timer
-Don't use any ISA sound cards, in means of performance, not quality. Suggesting to use USB version of SB16, won't hog your PCI bus.
-Update the BIOS (if available) - possible bug fixes, may add performance.

Other than that, I definitely suggest to get rid of the mobo you're using and get something robust, such as P5S-B or FIC VA-503+, to stay with the case. Of course giving it a superior VGA card, something like radeon 9xxx (your choice) and clock it up to the sky, giving you 112MHz FSB max for the first mobo, 124MHz for the latter one.

I'm going to follow you on the CPU buy, since the guy claims to have thousands and thousands of them, can wait. I'll be using the best of the best mobo (at least I think) with socket7, and that is the Iwill XA100 Plus - after my thorough browsing on the net I figured that this is the only one motherboard that gives you the 140MHz FSB option, making your CPU to go @ 840MHz 😀.

Have fun with your Pentium II 350! 😀

Edit (2015): Wow, this was a rather mean comment. Especially coming from me, I've been running K6-III+ for years now and I love it 🤣 . Sorry for being mean 😢 .

I figured that this is the only one motherboard that gives you the 140MHz FSB option, making your CPU to go @ 840MHz

A 140mhz bus with 6x multiplier, will the system really be stable at 840Mhz? 140*4.5 would give 648, which seems very high for a k6.

The board I have now does have some options for FSB>100, so I'll try it out. I have a feeling 133 x 6 will be unstable or non-booting though. I have to at least try 105 though.

And that voodoo card has a software controlled multiplier. I need to put a fan on its heatsink though.

carangil wrote:

I figured that this is the only one motherboard that gives you the 140MHz FSB option, making your CPU to go @ 840MHz

A 140mhz bus with 6x multiplier, will the system really be stable at 840Mhz? 140*4.5 would give 648, which seems very high for a k6.

840Mhz is very high for a K6, even for a mobile (though not impossible).

I'd say let it run @ 600Mhz and enjoy it's stability. If you want a 840Mhz K6 you'd better just use a P3.

carangil wrote:

The board I have now does have some options for FSB>100, so I'll try it out. I have a feeling 133 x 6 will be unstable or non-booting though. I have to at least try 105 though.

And that voodoo card has a software controlled multiplier. I need to put a fan on its heatsink though.

If you "really" want 133Mhz FSB, what might help is disabling the motherboard cache. Not sure if your chipset would also require additional cooling, I never tried to overclock a SS7 rig (I'm not a fan of overclocking).

I was mistaken about a 105Mhz setting; I must have been thinking of some other board I once worked with. But, I did bump up the FSB to 112. A 6x multiplier was not booting (672 Mhz), but 5.5 is working fine. (616 Mhz) My memory is still at CAS 2. I'll keep it at this speed for the time being. If I end up with any stability issues, like crashing in games or something, I'll drop back down to FSB 100. This motherboard has been rock-solid (knocks on wood) at FSB 100 since the day I got it back in 98 or 99, so I don't want to push it too far. Back then. I wouldn't overclock anything since everything cost so much $$, and I was lucky to have what I did and I didn't want to break anything. Now, stuff is so cheap, it doesn't matter too much.

616 is the max I've seen with two K6+ chips. The architecture seems to be at the ragged edge there. Even with lots of extra voltage they stop even POSTing at much beyond that speed. This is probably also indicated by AMD never launching an official 600 MHz K6.

This is one of the weirdest things I've seen but at 616 mhz my USB mouse is not recognized in windows 98. It works just fine in lubuntu. At 560 mhz with a 112 bus, everything is fine in both oses. But at 616 my USB mouse blinks on once and then quits. I might do a bench mark to see if 560 with a 112 bus beats 600 with a 100 bus; I guess it really deepens on if the game is memory bus bound or CPU bound. But on socket 7, your were constantly struggling with both!

I'm pretty sure the difference would be minimal. The FSB helps the K6-2s a lot. But the K6-2+ and K6-3 have onboard cache, reducing the FSB bottleneck.

IMHO 112MHz would be better.

Pity the FPU on the K6s is so bad, otherwise they would be awesome.

swaaye wrote:

616 is the max I've seen with two K6+ chips. The architecture seems to be at the ragged edge there. Even with lots of extra voltage they stop even POSTing at much beyond that speed. This is probably also indicated by AMD never launching an official 600 MHz K6.

It's not common, but I've seen accounts of significantly higher speeds with + (or even non +) K6 parts running at least relatively stable.

For the 250 nm parts, the most extreme example I've seen (with plain air cooling) is this guy's 660 MHz overclock http://www.overclockers.com/forums/showthread.php?t=43531 though he ended up frying it later on when he tried to push it higher with the I/O voltage above 4V. (the successful/stable 120x5x5 MHz run was done at 2.8V Vcore and 3.63VIO, he blew it at 3.0Vcore and 4.1VIO -probably the VIO that killed it; all using a P5A-B)

For the 180 nm mobiles, I've mostly seen high 600s in the upper range of "stable" systems, though rarely low 700s also appear on air cooling. Whether they're really stable or being run under safe parameters are other matters though, particularly with anything above 2.2V is pushing it for 180 nm parts in general. Unsurprisingly, it's the lower voltage rated parts with relatively high speed grades that tend to max out the highest, but those are also among the rarest. (unlike the common 1.6V 400 or 2.0V 450-550)
For the 250 nm parts, 2.8-3.0Vcore may not be that crazy given Cyrix/IBM/NS rated their 250 nm M2s at 2.9/3.0V as standard, though overheating will always be a concern. (not sure whether it's reasonably safe to push 180 nm parts beyond 2.2V for long periods, or if they run into problems like 130 nm parts tend to when pushed over 1.7V -as with Northwood)

It's motherboard dependent too, and from what I've read so far, the Asus P5A and P5A-B (as with the 660 above). The GA5AA may fare similarly, but I'm not sure, and I don't know about VIA based SS7 boards with competitive overclocking support.
With my own experience on my P5A-B, it does seem above average for overclocking stability, or I'm strangely lucky with the chips I've been testing. (particularly the Cyrix MII-366 -2.5x100- 2.9V running OK at stock voltage and 3x100)
I haven't had much luck at 133 MHz though (oddly enough a P55C-233 was the most stable -booting DOS and getting a speedsys score), but 125 MHz seems OK (provided the CPU can handle it).

Of course, for a general use system, I'd rather not push heavy out of spec running in any case (beyond modest voltage boosting and such), but it's fun to try and push things for some short-term testing at least.

kool kitty89 wrote:

It's motherboard dependent too, and from what I've read so far, the Asus P5A and P5A-B (as with the 660 above). The GA5AA may fare similarly, but I'm not sure, and I don't know about VIA based SS7 boards with competitive overclocking support.

True. Years ago I had a FIC VA-503+ and couldn't get 600 MHz stable regardless of voltage with 2 different K6-III+ chips. On the other hand, the ASUS P5A got me to 616.

:edit:

meant to post this in phils thread, mods please delete.

I killed a K6-3+ in a VA-503+ by running it at 600Mhz with a small voltage bump. Your 570 will probably be OK but I wouldn't push the volts any further.

All I can say is that AMD stopped at 570 MHz for a reason 😀

I would stop at 550 MHz. Better off overclocking the FSB past 100 MHz, it will give you better performance.

U can install the beta bios from here so the cpu get's recognized.

http://web.inter.nl.net/hcc/J.Steunebrink/k6plus.htm

This is super old thread guys, I accidently necro'd it thinking I was replying to Phil's 4 in 1 thread.

Speaking of, Phil you should test out Warcraft 3 and see how it runs on your system!

fyy wrote:

This is super old thread guys, I accidently necro'd it thinking I was replying to Phil's 4 in 1 thread.

Speaking of, Phil you should test out Warcraft 3 and see how it runs on your system!

Released in 2002, I'd say that machine is not ideal to play it.

WC3 doesn't work on Voodoo, I remember trying it in 02 😒

It does actually, it's just slow.