Except for the PII Klamath ones.

NitroX infinity wrote:

_All_ Pentium II and III processors are multiplier-locked (as far as I know).

Nope. there was a cutoff point. August 98, I think it was. That's why you could overclock the hell out of a Celeron 300A to 450 and swaaye mentioned in another thread the Pentium II 300 that could be overclocked all the way to 504mhz.

The Celeron 300A (AKA Mendocino) are actually locked. 4.5x66MHz=300MHz
To achieve 450 you had to run it on a 100MHz bus, that's why you had to get a 440BX board.

Not sure about the Covington though, not that you would want to use that. I'm pretty sure it too is multiplier locked.

northernosprey02 wrote:

I had installing bolder heatsink, but I got some problem to installing Slot 1 CPU. […]
Show full quote

I had installing bolder heatsink, but I got some problem to installing Slot 1 CPU.

How about P2B-F multiplier limited to x8.0?

So some people said not all PC133 SDRAM support this, it is true?

Is PII Klamath unlocked multiplier?

The P2B-F's x8 multiplier won't matter. If you install a Celeron 1400 for example, the processor will force the motherboard to run at x14.

It seems that quite a few Klamath PIIs are unlocked. I have an unlocked 233 and 300. Both were pulled from Compaq Deskpros. The 300 sure gets toasty under load, though.

There's a thread buried here about PIIs and how to determine which are locked. Most Klamaths are unlocked.

Which Pentium IIs can be underclocked?

swaaye wrote:

There's a thread buried here about PIIs and how to determine which are locked. Most Klamaths are unlocked.

Which Pentium IIs can be underclocked?

Maybe this thread should be merged into that one.

Resurrect this thread

I am rebuild the ASUS P2B-F system but one I am more hesitant is bulging capacitor, is it okay the capacitor bulging when system running?

bulging caps are not ok. u shld get them recapped and then only use the board to prevent it from getting further damaged.

swaaye wrote:

AGP 2x really is of limited practical value, especially for 3D cards of the time.

AGP 2x seems fine to me... You gain AGP texturing and there's not much of a performance difference between AGP 2x, 4x and even 8x. Below is my my 3DMark 2001 score using a 440BX based board, 128MB Geforce FX5700 (AGP 2x), 1.4GHz Tualatin Celeron (using Powerleap adapter) and 512MB PC100 RAM:

The CPU and possibly the 100MHz RAM will be holding the FX5700 back, not the AGP slot running at 2x.

😉

That wasn't what I meant. We were chatting about 440BX @ 133 MHz. The question came up about whether a PCI video card would be a good choice because PCI can be kept at 33 MHz specification. 90 MHz AGP makes many cards unstable. In many cases a PCI card like a Voodoo3/4/5 PCI is as fast as the AGP version.

swaaye wrote:

That wasn't what I meant. We were chatting about 440BX @ 133 MHz. The question came up about whether a PCI video card would be a good choice because PCI can be kept at 33 MHz specification. 90 MHz AGP makes many cards unstable. In many cases a PCI card like a Voodoo3/4/5 PCI is as fast as the AGP version.

Someone said the making it unstable when it OCed with 133FSB is the hard drive, is it true?

northernosprey02 wrote:

Someone said the making it unstable when it OCed with 133FSB is the hard drive, is it true?

Not likely, the PCI bus multiplier can be set to run at 33Mhz on 133FSB 440BX boards.

If I set the FSB to 133 on my 440BX board, I see graphical glitches when booting Windows, and then it hangs. In dos it's fine however. So the graphics card not liking the 90MHz AGP makes sense to me. My board also has a 112MHz setting, which is perfectly stable however.

Yeah running an intermediate speed between 100 and 133 certainly helps AGP stability.

BTW IIRC not all BX boards have the 1/4 divider BIOS option for PCI.