My xeons are on air and run very cool and quite. And I don't see the deal with speed step. Its only problem was with older system were it would get stuck at lower speeds.

Jade Falcon wrote:

My xeons are on air and run very cool and quite. And I don't see the deal with speed step. Its only problem was with older system were it would get stuck at lower speeds.

It's minor little things. Mainly makes little pops and clicks with usb audio / headphones, even with modern computers like broadwell. I've seen little glitches in some games when it shifts speeds. Mostly it's a lot more dramatic with big overclocks where it's shifting between 4800 mhz and 1200hz in a split second.

kithylin wrote:

Jade Falcon wrote:

My xeons are on air and run very cool and quite. And I don't see the deal with speed step. Its only problem was with older system were it would get stuck at lower speeds.

It's minor little things. Mainly makes little pops and clicks with usb audio / headphones, even with modern computers like broadwell. I've seen little glitches in some games when it shifts speeds. Mostly it's a lot more dramatic with big overclocks where it's shifting between 4800 mhz and 1200hz in a split second.

That's new one for me. Never once heard of speed step messing with sound.. Only problem I seen is the clock close speed gets stuck at lower speeds and doesn't adjust well.

Jade Falcon wrote:

kithylin wrote:

Jade Falcon wrote:

My xeons are on air and run very cool and quite. And I don't see the deal with speed step. Its only problem was with older system were it would get stuck at lower speeds.

It's minor little things. Mainly makes little pops and clicks with usb audio / headphones, even with modern computers like broadwell. I've seen little glitches in some games when it shifts speeds. Mostly it's a lot more dramatic with big overclocks where it's shifting between 4800 mhz and 1200hz in a split second.

That's new one for me. Never once heard of speed step messing with sound.. Only problem I seen is the clock close speed gets stuck at lower speeds and doesn't adjust well.

There's also that you described. Sometimes playing older games I may want full cpu speed for best performance, but the older games don't load the chip enough to get it to kick in to turbo speed.

It's just a lot nicer/easier and best all around to just lock it at a fixed speed and leave it.

Also, with most chips it's only +/- 5-7 watts difference on power at max turbo vs stock.. so negligible that I'd just leave it turbo'd always, and usually do on all my machines.

I always left turbo off. I don't much see the point on 1-200 MHz on a core or two, but if you were to use it ether leave it on or off, I don't see much any benefit in having a turbo automatically controlled.

Speedstep has come a longs way and I never seem to have problems with it anymore. Manly late 1366 and up are fine and tend not to get stuck at lower speeds. I guise it makes a deference it for setup everything right and have the drivers installed and whatnot.

Not sure if this is "Modern", but it runs Windows 10 x64 - so it can't be THAT* old 😁
*to be in "retro" section

Diamond Radeon 9250 256MB PCI :

System specs (CPU-z valid) : https://valid.x86.fr/6g7v5p

"Microsoft Basic Display Adapter"

I bet it doesn't even do Direct3D 1-9 and OpenGL 1.x properly...

DracoNihil wrote:

"Microsoft Basic Display Adapter"

I bet it doesn't even do Direct3D 1-9 and OpenGL 1.x properly...

It does good enough job for 3DMark 01 SE to run in default mode on DVI monitor 😀

agent_x007 wrote:

It does good enough job for 3DMark 01 SE to run in default mode on DVI monitor 😀

Just beat my SiS 630 IGP score (only because your card supported the Nature test). 🤣

Kamerat wrote:

Just beat my SiS 630 IGP score (only because your card supported the Nature test). 🤣

Actually... my card "supports" more than just Nature test on 3DMark 01 SE 😁

^FYI : Nature test from 3DMark 03 and all tests 3DMark 05 require DX9.0 hardware support (and Radeon 9250 clearly doesn't have that).
That's why I think M$ wrote a DX9 hardware emulator, instead of simple VGA driver 😎
Interesting isn't it ?

Valids :
http://www.3dmark.com/3dm03/6534007
http://www.3dmark.com/3dm05/5544059

agent_x007 wrote:

^FYI : Nature test from 3DMark 03 and all tests 3DMark 05 require DX9.0 hardware support (and Radeon 9250 clearly doesn't have that).
That's why I think M$ wrote a DX9 hardware emulator, instead of simple VGA driver 😎
Interesting isn't it ?

Interestingand painful. 😈

Remember using 3D-Analyze so that I could run '01 Nature on my GeForce DDR, tried it again today but I realized the water at the end are missing a lot of rendering. 😵

Got an Asus P8Z68-V Pro/Gen3 motherboard. It powers on, but no boot. Suspect it's a bad BIOS chip. Tried to recover BIOS via USB, but failed. Tried to read the BIOS with an Aardvark, but it does not seem to be able to read anything.

Anyone else have relatively modern BIOS chips just die (not sure how that is possible, as board is in good condition)?

Bought this thing a day before Phil released 10k SCSI YT video 😀

Picking up a free Dell latitude e5510 along with an old D600. E5510 needs drive/Cady and ram, has a 2nd gen i3. D600 might make a good retro laptop. 1.7 Pentium M with Radeon 9000 graphics.

D600, you *might* be able to find Windows 98 drivers for it. I recall running 98SE on a ThinkPad T42 before

agent_x007 wrote:

Actually... my card "supports" more than just Nature test on 3DMark 01 SE :D ^FYI : Nature test from 3DMark 03 and all tests 3DM […]
Show full quote

Kamerat wrote:

Just beat my SiS 630 IGP score (only because your card supported the Nature test). 🤣

Actually... my card "supports" more than just Nature test on 3DMark 01 SE 😁
^FYI : Nature test from 3DMark 03 and all tests 3DMark 05 require DX9.0 hardware support (and Radeon 9250 clearly doesn't have that).
That's why I think M$ wrote a DX9 hardware emulator, instead of simple VGA driver 😎
Interesting isn't it ?

Valids :
http://www.3dmark.com/3dm03/6534007
http://www.3dmark.com/3dm05/5544059

Congratulations, you just bought a video card that's too old for Windows 10, and called it "modern". You're benchmarking the software renderer, which is considerably slower than integrated graphics available with most modern CPUs. Post clearly belongs in a topic in Marvin, but that's just me backseat moderating.

kode54 wrote:

Congratulations, you just bought a video card that's too old for Windows 10, and called it "modern". You're benchmarking the software renderer, which is considerably slower than integrated graphics available with most modern CPUs. Post clearly belongs in a topic in Marvin, but that's just me backseat moderating.

It's true that I'm probably benching software renderer.
But here's a thing :
A "retro" hardware, that runs Windows 10 x64 ?
You know that in Retro hardware section there are Pentium II/Pentium III's and even older CPU's, right ?
To be clear : I didn't bought this card to run Win 10 x64 on it on a daily basis.

Windows 10 could run on a Cirrus Logic video card from the 1990s if you could pair it with a compatible machine. Same Basic Adapter thing. A VESA BIOS framebuffer. Well, assuming you could get a Cirrus Logic card with integrated support for a linear framebuffer. I don't know if the Basic adapter supports bank switching video modes. Possibly not.

agent_x007 wrote:

It's true that I'm probably benching software renderer. But here's a thing : A "retro" hardware, that runs Windows 10 x64 ? You […]
Show full quote

kode54 wrote:

Congratulations, you just bought a video card that's too old for Windows 10, and called it "modern". You're benchmarking the software renderer, which is considerably slower than integrated graphics available with most modern CPUs. Post clearly belongs in a topic in Marvin, but that's just me backseat moderating.

It's true that I'm probably benching software renderer.
But here's a thing :
A "retro" hardware, that runs Windows 10 x64 ?
You know that in Retro hardware section there are Pentium II/Pentium III's and even older CPU's, right ?
To be clear : I didn't bought this card to run Win 10 x64 on it on a daily basis.

I have installed Windows 10 on P4's and wouldn't call the P4 "modern" 😊

P4 is more modern than retro (at least, 64-bit capable ones) 😉