computergeek92 wrote:

the tualatin has .13 core like throughbred. plus the 1.4 tualatin is as fast as a 2ghz pentium 4. in that case, is the athlon xp 2000+ exactly as fast as a tualatin piii 1.4ghz with 512k cache?

Close enough for other factors to be more important.

On average I would think the 1667 MHz XP 2000+ would be a little bit faster.

The AXP that the Tualatin is closest to beating is probably 1600+. I think the 512k part just made up for the clock-for-clock gap between the PIII and T-bird Athlons.

Then even an Athlon 1400c 266fsb was slower than the tualatin 1.4?

firage wrote:

The AXP that the Tualatin is closest to beating is probably 1600+. I think the 512k part just made up for the clock-for-clock gap between the PIII and T-bird Athlons.

Because of the difference in bus/memory speed I think the Tualatin P3 1400-S would win almost every benchmark against the 1400 MHz Athlon 1600+, the 1466 MHz 1700+ would probably be a better match-up. I cant say I have looked into this very closely though.

Using DDR memory with the Athlon and PC133 with the P3 1400-S could probably make thet Athlon come out on top though, there are always many factors in play.

I'm comparing to find the fastest system with an isa slot and it seems that the 266fsb via kt133a was the best, some boards could support Palomino 2100+ or Thoroughbred 2600+ but with only sdram. How will this affect the comparison since ddr is out of the picture? Those KT133a boards supporting Athlon xp seem very hard to find versus pentium iii boards I could use a tualatin adaptor with. So i'm hoping the 1.4 Tualatin would be a good deal.

It would be nifty to build a fast enough system with Windows XP and 1gb or 1.5gb ram to play the gog.com games with classic ISA powered soundblaster 16 audio!

I built something pretty fast and small, and quiet: Chaintech 6via5t with PIII-T 1.4@1.5 GHz, 1GB CL2 ram, GF4Ti 128MB, Voodoo2, ISA audio, 40GB laptop HDD, slim CD drive, WiFi, FDD and triple boot DOS-W3.1 (with 256 colors SVGA driver) / Win 98 / Win XP. Using small self made open case with miniature power supply. I posted some time ago some build pics (with different mainboard) here Re: What retro activity did you get up to today?.

I think that's my ultimate retro PC, considering the functionality and ability to hold entire PC in one hand and replace components whenever you want to 😜 everything is paired with my main PC by KVM switch.

I don't know if Athlon XP would be better, but I don't want to use it because of power consumption, heat and noise. My machine is almost silent (i soldered resistors to the fans).

computergeek92 wrote:

I'm comparing to find the fastest system with an isa slot and it seems that the 266fsb via kt133a was the best, some boards could support Palomino 2100+ or Thoroughbred 2600+ but with only sdram. How will this affect the comparison since ddr is out of the picture? Those KT133a boards supporting Athlon xp seem very hard to find versus pentium iii boards I could use a tualatin adaptor with. So i'm hoping the 1.4 Tualatin would be a good deal.

It's very difficult to say--I wasn't paying attention, back then. It's possible if you found the right combination of server board that you may be surprised. I remember reading about some of the Supermicro motherboards, and how they opted to use PC100/PC133 rather than switch to the then new DDRAM because running PC133 in Dual-Channel was just as fast, if not a tad faster, than moving to the new, more expensive DDR tech.

It seems to take a bit of work to find a board with the combination of all desirable factors, Dual-Channel SDRAM, ISA, AGP, Tualatin support, etc.

On that mainboard (694T chipset) i have ALU 475MB/s and FPU 481 MB/s performance with CL2 ram and 142MHz FSB. I think that's even better than 440BX.

This one can help you decide. Sadly hes not testing faster Athlon CPU's. Maybe in next part....

http://www.cnews.cz/testy/test-historickych-p … rch/strana/0/11

i would say the match really depends on motherboards they are using.
if the p3s is using 815 board(best chioce for it), and the axp is using kt133a board(a rather old board for it), the p3s-1.4g is estimated to be on par with xp1700+(1.47g) at best.
but it the axp is using newer kt266a/kt333 or even nforce2 baords with ddr ram, the p3s would be totally no match for xp1600+(1.4g).

adalbert wrote:

On that mainboard (694T chipset) i have ALU 475MB/s and FPU 481 MB/s performance with CL2 ram and 142MHz FSB. I think that's even better than 440BX.

don't care too much about synthetic benchmarks, in more complicated benchmarks like 3dmark and quake3 or even superpi you will find that the 694 is quite a bit slower than intel's 440bx and 815.
its the same as p4-willamette vs p3s, the p4 performed superbly in some synthetic benchmarks but in actual games it simply suck.

I have a Barton Athlon XP running on my KT133 chipset Motherboard, although getting the full range of multipliers isn't possible
without modding, bios and hardware mods. I could run some benchmarks at 1400mhz if You are interested.
Realistically VIA should have called it KT100 as only the Memory will run at 133mhz.

Imperious wrote:

I have a Barton Athlon XP running on my KT133 chipset Motherboard, although getting the full range of multipliers isn't possible
without modding, bios and hardware mods. I could run some benchmarks at 1400mhz if You are interested.
Realistically VIA should have called it KT100 as only the Memory will run at 133mhz.

🤣, via was always doing this way, model numbers indicate the memory clock rather than cpu fsb running.
kt133: 100*2fsb+pc133
kt133a: 133*2fsb+pc133
kt266/266a: 133*2fsb+ddr266
kt333: 133*2fsb+ddr333
kt400/400a: 166*2fsb+ddr400
kt600(?): 200*2fsb+ddr400
kt880: 200*2fsb+dual channel ddr400, said to be even faster than nforce2 but too late for market, socket 462 cpus were already vanishing when it came out so few boards were made.

I have KT333 boards that work fine with FSB166 CPU's (Shuttle AK35GT2/R for example) - as well as KT400 boards that work with FSB200 CPU's (Gigabyte GA-7VAXP).

kanecvr wrote:

I have KT333 boards that work fine with FSB166 CPU's (Shuttle AK35GT2/R for example) - as well as KT400 boards that work with FSB200 CPU's (Gigabyte GA-7VAXP).

Me too, Asus A7v333 has official support for the barton cpu's at 333fsb.

nForce2 was the fastet chipset you could run an Athlon with. Via never came close to the speed of Intel/AMD Chipsets. Hmm never heard of DASP before, but it was the special Sauce so it seems.

http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/mainboards/d … 80_9.html#sect0

Athlon XP's are faster than P3-S, their 512KB Cache and Prefetch couldn't help competing against the Athlon's very strong FPU. Albeit the normal Athlon C with a KT133A Board would struggle competing against a Tualatin with a BX440 @ 133-MHz FSB.

kanecvr wrote:

I have KT333 boards that work fine with FSB166 CPU's (Shuttle AK35GT2/R for example) - as well as KT400 boards that work with FSB200 CPU's (Gigabyte GA-7VAXP).

yes they do, but not an officially claimed support by via. its just like the 440bx: while many boards were made to work with 133fsb coppermines, intel never claimed it to have 133fsb support.

Although both system types perform very close to one another, the KT133A boards look like a better choice than PIII boards due to supporting 1.5GB ram which would be great for pushing it as a Windows XP system to it's max power. (XP flies on 1.5gb and 2gb) But weren't the VIA Apollo Pro 133A chipset boards buggy and strange compared to the Intel 815 boards? They support 1gb or 1.5gb (depending on number of ram slots) I myself own a Tyan S1854 board. It would not support the Tualatin, but it has the Apollo Pro 133A chipset, the ide ports won't run at their rated speed, several crappy system drivers such as the agp driver that only worked good with a certain version number, and the board oddly has both a PPGA Celeron Socket 370 and a Pentium II/III Slot 1 on it.