I have an FIC PA-2013 2.1 with 2MB Cache and I can vouch for it being a great board. I can't even remember where I got it but it has been the foundation of several of my ultimate Windows 98 \ DOS builds since maybe 2005. Never had a problem with it, and I'm very glad that it is a 2.1 version because I'm certain that I would have blown it up with an AGP voodoo card at some point if it weren't.

It's worth noting that the board says 2.0 in one spot (near the pa-2013 name I think) but 2.1 near the lower left corner, so if you're looking for one don't write off every model that says 2.0 unless it doesn't say 2.1 anywhere. Also mine has a chip missing near the back of the AGP slot, and I think the models with the AGP problems will have this spot populated with the offending chip.

Thanks guys for the advices and tips.

I agree.... If I want faster than 500Mhz, I just build a Pentium3 or something.
Overclocking old hardware, is just too fragile and not healthy in the long-run. Especially when now, it is super-rare and expansive to buy/own SS7 motherboards...

I decided to leave 600Mhz (2x) at jumper side, But in MSDOS, I will set the CPU speed to 450Mhz via startup(using setmul) by adding a setmul entry, in autoexec.bat.
Likewise, for Windows 95 98 and XP, I will use windows software (like CrystalID) to set to 450Mhz OR 500Mhz and put that shortcut in Window's StartUp.

Doing so, I don't have to open the computer casing (again) and play around with the jumpers (which is very difficult, its near to the CDROM, extremely small area to work with..) .

It should be "okay/safe", right?

Ozzuneoj wrote:

I have an FIC PA-2013 2.1 with 2MB Cache and I can vouch for it being a great board. I can't even remember where I got it but it has been the foundation of several of my ultimate Windows 98 \ DOS builds since maybe 2005. Never had a problem with it, and I'm very glad that it is a 2.1 version because I'm certain that I would have blown it up with an AGP voodoo card at some point if it weren't.

It's worth noting that the board says 2.0 in one spot (near the pa-2013 name I think) but 2.1 near the lower left corner, so if you're looking for one don't write off every model that says 2.0 unless it doesn't say 2.1 anywhere. Also mine has a chip missing near the back of the AGP slot, and I think the models with the AGP problems will have this spot populated with the offending chip.

The problem is easy to solve. Just use an TNT2-Pro or Ultra. Then pair it with two V2 in sli. I'll bet that you will get a more versatile setup this way.

Panties wrote:

Overclocking old hardware, is just too fragile and not healthy in the long-run. Especially when now, it is super-rare and expansive to buy/own SS7 motherboards...

Well, in this generation, you are not really overclocking the board, just the CPU - by selecting a combination of bus and multiplier that the board natively supports, but yields a CPU clock higher than intended for the chip in question.

But if the CPU fries there's the possibility it'll take the motherboard with it to the great retro heaven.

brostenen wrote:

Ozzuneoj wrote:

I have an FIC PA-2013 2.1 with 2MB Cache and I can vouch for it being a great board. I can't even remember where I got it but it has been the foundation of several of my ultimate Windows 98 \ DOS builds since maybe 2005. Never had a problem with it, and I'm very glad that it is a 2.1 version because I'm certain that I would have blown it up with an AGP voodoo card at some point if it weren't.

It's worth noting that the board says 2.0 in one spot (near the pa-2013 name I think) but 2.1 near the lower left corner, so if you're looking for one don't write off every model that says 2.0 unless it doesn't say 2.1 anywhere. Also mine has a chip missing near the back of the AGP slot, and I think the models with the AGP problems will have this spot populated with the offending chip.

The problem is easy to solve. Just use an TNT2-Pro or Ultra. Then pair it with two V2 in sli. I'll bet that you will get a more versatile setup this way.

That'd depend on the intended purpose, I was just giving my experience with the board. 😀

Personally I did a 2D + V2 SLI setup most of the time I used this board, but have since realized that if I want to play accelerated games of any kind I'd want more CPU power to completely remove any bottleneck... P3 1Ghz or better... and would likely use a Voodoo 3 3500 or v5 5500 for games that work best with Glide. Honestly though, there aren't many old games that I'm interested in that are 3D accelerated that wouldn't be better on a 6800GT... and I'm planning a build for that still. 😀

dr_st wrote:

Panties wrote:

Overclocking old hardware, is just too fragile and not healthy in the long-run. Especially when now, it is super-rare and expansive to buy/own SS7 motherboards...

Well, in this generation, you are not really overclocking the board, just the CPU - by selecting a combination of bus and multiplier that the board natively supports, but yields a CPU clock higher than intended for the chip in question.

devius wrote:

But if the CPU fries there's the possibility it'll take the motherboard with it to the great retro heaven.

^^This.

And lets not forget that this may also shorten the lifespan of its onboard components or bring out other problems.
Even having to troubleshoot problematic hardware time and time again may result in hardware getting damaged by accident.
It's one of the reasons that, if it works, do not touch it! It's fine! 😁

brostenen wrote:

Ozzuneoj wrote:

I have an FIC PA-2013 2.1 with 2MB Cache and I can vouch for it being a great board. I can't even remember where I got it but it has been the foundation of several of my ultimate Windows 98 \ DOS builds since maybe 2005. Never had a problem with it, and I'm very glad that it is a 2.1 version because I'm certain that I would have blown it up with an AGP voodoo card at some point if it weren't.

It's worth noting that the board says 2.0 in one spot (near the pa-2013 name I think) but 2.1 near the lower left corner, so if you're looking for one don't write off every model that says 2.0 unless it doesn't say 2.1 anywhere. Also mine has a chip missing near the back of the AGP slot, and I think the models with the AGP problems will have this spot populated with the offending chip.

The problem is easy to solve. Just use an TNT2-Pro or Ultra. Then pair it with two V2 in sli. I'll bet that you will get a more versatile setup this way.

Perhaps GF2MX may be a better way to go? Those are faster most of the times along with less power draw.

I used a board that I presumed had this issue and I ended up using a TNT2 M64 in its AGP slot (it could even have been a Vanta, those don't even have a heatsink 🤣. How 'cool' is that? 😁) and used a Voodoo 2 along with it for the 3D power.

Tetrium wrote:

brostenen wrote:

Ozzuneoj wrote:

I have an FIC PA-2013 2.1 with 2MB Cache and I can vouch for it being a great board. I can't even remember where I got it but it has been the foundation of several of my ultimate Windows 98 \ DOS builds since maybe 2005. Never had a problem with it, and I'm very glad that it is a 2.1 version because I'm certain that I would have blown it up with an AGP voodoo card at some point if it weren't.

It's worth noting that the board says 2.0 in one spot (near the pa-2013 name I think) but 2.1 near the lower left corner, so if you're looking for one don't write off every model that says 2.0 unless it doesn't say 2.1 anywhere. Also mine has a chip missing near the back of the AGP slot, and I think the models with the AGP problems will have this spot populated with the offending chip.

The problem is easy to solve. Just use an TNT2-Pro or Ultra. Then pair it with two V2 in sli. I'll bet that you will get a more versatile setup this way.

Perhaps GF2MX may be a better way to go? Those are faster most of the times along with less power draw.

I used a board that I presumed had this issue and I ended up using a TNT2 M64 in its AGP slot (it could even have been a Vanta, those don't even have a heatsink 🤣. How 'cool' is that? 😁) and used a Voodoo 2 along with it for the 3D power.

... the GF2 MX would help at high resolutions. I swapped my MSI TNT2 Pro for a Geforce 2 GTS to be able to play at 1600x1200. I get about 40-50 fps in most games, but that's alright. The only ones under-performing on my K6-3 are Expendable and Homeworld, but then HW slows to a crawl in dense battles even on a 700MHz P3. It's funny how they listed a 350MHz pentium II as recommended requirements 😜

[EDITED]

Right - somehow unrelated, but kind of interesting nonetheless - the K6 architecture is RISC86 - similar to the K5 in the way that it has a RISC x86 encoder/decoder witch translates x86 instructions internally to ones the chomper/sharptooth core can understand and process naively. I believe this decoder is responsible for the CPU's poor performance to clock speed scaling. I thing the decoder runs at FSB speed - and here's why: the K6-2/3 seems to manifest these scaling issues a lot earlier at FSB 66 then it does at fsb 100*. It would also kind of explain why the CPU really hates going over 100Mhz fsb regardless of how much voltage you pump in it. This is just a theory tough.

* there is very little performance increase between 333 and 400mhz at fsb66, just like there is little performance increase form 550 to 600MHz.

Look at this baby:

The decoder seems pretty complex, and it seems like it's a big part of the chip. If it is indeed limited to a certain speed (say FSB speed) or has a divider like say 2:1 cpu speed, poor performance / clock speed scaling makes sense, and so does instability above 550 Mhz.

kanecvr wrote:

The only ones under-performing on my K6-3 are Expendable and Homeworld, but then HW slows to a crawl in dense battles even on a 700MHz P3. It's funny how they listed a 350MHz pentium II as recommended requirements 😜

Maybe because back then 30fps average was considered good, and 20-25fps acceptable.

devius wrote:

kanecvr wrote:

The only ones under-performing on my K6-3 are Expendable and Homeworld, but then HW slows to a crawl in dense battles even on a 700MHz P3. It's funny how they listed a 350MHz pentium II as recommended requirements 😜

Maybe because back then 30fps average was considered good, and 20-25fps acceptable.

Mission 6 - Kadiir nebula - hundreds of tiny swarmer ships flying everyware - a 400MHz PII struggles to get 10 fps - 20-25 would be awesome (regardless of playing at 640x480 or 1600x1200 on a nice fast video card). The game has VERY high CPU usage. It can top out a 1GHz P3 no problem. In multiplayer you could have serious framedrops on a fast athlon!

You're talking about Homeworld? If so, you must mean Gardens and Cathedral of Kadesh (missions 7 and 😎. That wasn't so demanding on resources as Bridge of Sighs and subsequent missions later on in the campaign, mainly because I'd stolen almost everything in sight including about 40 ion cannon frigates. Mission 6 just involves blowing up some asteroids before they hit your fleet.

gdjacobs wrote:

You're talking about Homeworld? If so, you must mean Gardens and Cathedral of Kadesh (missions 7 and 😎. That wasn't so demanding on resources as Bridge of Sighs and subsequent missions later on in the campaign, mainly because I'd stolen almost everything in sight including about 40 ion cannon frigates. Mission 6 just involves blowing up some asteroids before they hit your fleet.

Yeah it's 7 and 8. I finished the game on a k6-2 overclocked to 400Mhz and a voodoo 2. Somehow I didn't notice just how bad the FPS was back then - maybe because the game was so good. I tried to replay the game recently on my K6-III... nope... moved on to a 600MHz P3... nope.... only my tualatin can properly handle the game, but it still manages to lag sometimes.

But so awesome with full eye candy enabled.

leileilol wrote:

a surviving one. Most SS7 boards were often cheaply produced and wouldn't last after a few years of use (read: not one year of use and 16 years of hoarding), be it capacitors or not

Yeah pretty much this. Board availability drastically decreased in recent years not just beacuse people threw them away. In their time there were a lot of problems with them, much more trouble than with higher priced i440BX motherboards.

My Epox MVP3G-M blew its caps after a startup in 2006, and more recently the Biostar M5SAF in a Fujitsu Siemens Celvin refuses to start.
Im kind of afraid to even use my hoarded S7 boards, and i dont even think about using them regularly. Then again maybe im too paranoid since an Abit KA7-100 with a Slot A Athlon has been used almost daily for the last 7 years for light Office work and it fares okay even though 2000 wasnt the best year for Abit and its capacitor suppliers.

Probably true. My K6 system is on its second (or third) board, but it has this same board for, I dunno, 12-13 out of it's almost 18 years of existence? Probably the only reason it still works is because it's barely used.

I'd say that the best Ali Aladdin V mb is the Gigabyte GA-5AX REV 5.2 without any doubt, second place the Asus P5A.

While for mvp3 i'm not sure what the best could be every mb has pro and cons:

FIC PA-2013
512kb-1-2mb cache
60 / 66 / 68 / 75 / 83 / 95 100 / 112 / 124
1.5x – 5.5x
1.80v – 3.50v (0.1v increments)
UDMA33
+ space for larger heatsinks, linear burst support (jumper)

AOpen AX59-PRO
1mb cache
60 / 66 / 75 / 83 / 90 / 100 / 112
2.0x – 5.5x
1.30v – 3.50v (0.05/0.1v increments)
UDMA33

EpoX EP-MVP3G5
1-2mb cache
66 / 68 / 75 / 83 / 95 100 / 112 / 124 / 133
1.5x – 5.5x
1.80v – 3.20v (0.1v increments)
UDMA 66
+ linear burst support (bios)

DFI K6XV3+/66
512kb/1mb cache
66 / 75 / 83 / 95 100 /
1.5x – 5.5x
1.30v – 3.50v (0.05v increments)
ATA66
- slowest according to phil's tests, no fsb over 100

So the best for cache memory on board is the Fic or EpoX, but both starts the voltage from 1.80, instead of 1.30 (1.60 can be handy for AMD K-6-III+/400ATZ) while Aopen and DFI starts from 1.30, the highest fsb support is for EpoX, DFI and Epox have support for ATA66.
Share your opinions!

Kinda old, but I'd also suggest the SYE/LuckyTech P5MVP3 as a GOOD candidate. Overclocks well with a K6-2 500, has a very nice layout while being compact (and cute 😀 )

512KB cache, supports most CPUs (including K6-2+ and III+), BIOS files can be found quite easily (including a HDD patched bios,BIOS string being 06/14/2000-VP3-586B-SMC6-2A5LESHDC-00) and is really stable.

Have owned it in the past, but killed because I was new into building PCs and made mistakes. FFwd today, and I've managed to track down a seller in Romania (Bucharest) who has a lot of them (and a few more that are nice, like the ACORP 5VIA77) at various prices. One thing I never figured out on these is... where is the fan header? I know some boards had just a few simple pins as the fan header, but this one doesn't seem to have (or I can't notice it.)

PcBytes wrote:

Kinda old, but I'd also suggest the SYE/LuckyTech P5MVP3 as a GOOD candidate. Overclocks well with a K6-2 500, has a very nice layout while being compact (and cute 😀 )

Not so much if you need lots of clearance for long PCI cards (like a Voodoo), but that's a common sacrifice for baby AT SS7 boards.

PcBytes wrote:

One thing I never figured out on these is... where is the fan header?

Not all boards from this era had a fan header. This only started becoming common practice on ATX boards.