Which BIOS version are you using with your Shuttle HOT-433 rev. 1-3? I am aware of the following BIOS versions:

433AIP16
433AUE2A
433AUE23
433AUE26
433AUE33
433AUE2A
433AUE2C
433AUE22
433AUE10

whereby,

433AIP16 = Original AMI BIOS for rev 1-3 w/mouse support.
433AUE2A = AMI BIOS for the EPROM Programmer, not flashable.
433AUE23 = AMI BIOS for rev 1-3, nonflashable.
433AUS26 = AMI Bios for rev 1-3 with PS/2 mouse support.
433AUE33 = Latest AMI BIOS for rev4 of the Shuttle HOT-433 motherboard.
433AUE22 = ?
433AUS2A = AMI BIOS for rev 1-3. Some reports say for rev4.
433AUS2C = Latest AMI BIOS for rev 1-3.
433WIE10 = AWARD BIOS with date 7/25/1995 (for rev 1-3 of Shuttle HOT-433)

I have troubleshooted the HOT-433 in great length using 1024 KB cache and 256 MB RAM. I have found the reliability of this motherboard to be questionable. In the past, I have tested 5 in total. Please refer to the recent discussion on this particular configuration here, Shuttle HOT-433 with 1 MB cache

Have you tried detecting an IDE harddrive with ~500 MB? What are your cache/RAM timing settings? What is your BIOS block mode and LBA mode st to? Try reducing the cache to 256 KB or 512 KB (and re-jumper) and the RAM to 64 MB and re-test. From my experience, this motherboard doesn't work well with 1024 KB cache. How many wire IDE cable are you using? Oddly enough, I find the older style ( < ATA33) 40-pin cables tend to be less problematic in older 486 motherboards.

As for why you can't seem to update your BIOS, you may be using the wrong version of the flash utility. Please refer to my attachment and read the readme.txt. This readme is a work in progress, which I've added various comments to throughout the years. I am not sure of the original source anymore.

Is your RTC keeping time? I've seen some motherboard, whereby if the RTC was faulty (even if the wall power was plugged in), the motherboard wouldn't boot right. Are you using FPM or EDO RAM? Try using FPM RAM. What is the L1 cache mode set to? Some 486 motherboard configurations don't like L1 write-back cache, even if a write-back CPU is installed. Is your DX4-100 a WB or a WT CPU? I find the Intel DX4-100 w/16KB WB cache to be a good starting-point CPU for motherboard troubleshooting (as well as an Intel DX2-66 WT).

Good luck!

Hi!
First, my bios is 433AIP16. Today, I've flashed just for fun 433AUE33 (I was unable to flash 433AUS2C with flash465). After this, my CMOS was reset and now it seems to work fine!

My hard drive is beeing detected and there are not problems with 1mb cache and 256mb ram. The dallas-module is ok and still has enogh power. So it seems, now everything is ok 😀 I've also installed an AM486DX5-133V16BGC CPU and set my L2-Cache to WT, as its needed to cache 256mb according to the manual.

I would like to test the AWARD-Bios, but I've strange problems. The flash itself works fine, but I don't get any vga-output! Any ideas why? The bios is booting! My port80-card also shows, thats its booting fine and your hear the normal beep post 1 time.

What testing criteria did you use to establish that your HOT-433 w/1024 KB cache was fine? Can you run CTCM, CTCM7, Chkcpu, and MemTest (for 2 hrs+) and present the results? Also, an installation of Win98SE may also help prove stability. What BIOS cache/RAM settings are you using?

Have you gotten your PS/2 mouse port working? It is curious that you went with a BIOS version intended for the rev4 boards. The Rev4 boards only supported up to 512 KB in a single bank, if I recall, however the BIOS might not care.

I'm unfamiliar with your VGA issues. Try a different graphics card, try a different PCI slot, try an ISA graphics card, or try switching slots. My tests indicate that this board is very finicky with certain card combinations.

Hi!
Very interesting 😀 My opinion of "stable" was, that Win98SE runs fine. It just installed w/o any problems.

BUT,
i've tried ctcm16n and ctcm17a and both show, that there seems to be none of any L2-cache. But the BIOS itself reports "1024 KB CACHE FOUND".

When I start ctcm16n with /L2=1024K, it seems to detect the cache and the speed would indicate, thats in use. Is is correct? Or I am wrong? ctcm17n crashes always, when its benchmarking, regardless of the cache size.

When I set the cache to 512K Single Bank or Double Bank, the BIOS reports "512 KB CACHE FOUND" and ctcm detecteds the cache correctly.

So, you are right, it seems to work in some way, but maybe not correctly. Is there an specific benchmark for windows, that would indicate, if the cache is working or not?

I've also borowed an external flasher from a friend, so I could flash 433AUS2C for my mainboard. The result where the same. I've also noticed, that 433AUS2C is older, as there are some option missing, like MODE4 for IDE-transfer or ECP+EPP for LTP-setting.

CTCM7 will always hang on a 486 at the point of the Pentium instruction call, but the valuable information is before that anyway.

Your symptoms are very similar to mine, except I wasn't lucky enough to get as far as a Windows 98 installation.

What does cachechk v4, cachechk v7, and Speedsys 4.78 show for you?

Of all the Windows utility programs I've tested, I haven't found any which correctly display the amount of cache, however there are some Windows-based benchmark programs which will indicate a decreased score when all the RAM isn't cached. Please refer to the Ultimate 486 Benchmark Comparison for which programs these are (4th paragraph under ADDITIONAL DISCUSSION).

Have you tried any other PCI-based socket 3 motherboard that works well with 1024 KB cache? If so, which ones? I am always looking to improve my own World's Fastest 486 . The only draw-back to my current system is 512 KB cache is maximum, and only WB mode supported. Considering that it has the same UMC chipset as other MB's that support 1024 KB cache, I wonder if I can modify the board to somehow accept and properly work with 1024 KB? The BIOS and Northbridge would need to know about the extra cache though. Any ideas?

Hi!
I hadn't any access past few month, as my 433's got recapped. Now I got time to test with 1MB Cache.
It seems, that only ctcm16n does not like 1MB Cache? Its really wired. ctcm16n says, no cache, 512k oder 2048k cache.
I've also run CACHE.EXE (German Chip-Tool)

Picture 1/2 with 1024K
Picture 3/4 with 512K

Picture 5/6 with 512K
Picture 7 and further with 1024K

See the pictures here: http://imgur.com/a/12DXR

Speedsys 4.78 shows the right value for 512K and 1024K cache. Here are both images: http://imgur.com/FpWUIHd,0mInHXl
The cache seems to be active for me.

So what now? Does the Cache works?

I too always got wonky ctcm L2 measurements with the HOT-433. Install 256 MB RAM in L2 WB mode. Boot into Windows and run CpuMark99. Note down the score. Shutdown and install 128 MB RAM. Boot into Winows and re-run CpuMark99. Did the score increase significantly?

Yes, it does:

256MB = 3.76
128MB = 5.42

256MB with L2 WT gives 5.08

Based on those numbers, the board seems to be caching the full amount of RAM inasmuch as CPUMark is concerned. That is the best test I have found for this. As you can see, the benefit of WB L2 over WT L2 isn't very grand. What FSB and CPU did you use?

Do you plan on building a system based on the HOT-433 v1-3? Which hardware specs? All attempts I have had at building a fully setup system using SCSI with this board eventually failed. At times, days would go by where I'd think, "this board seems alright", then it would start acting all wonky. I would be interested to hear about your experiences with this board in the long-haul. When I setup systems, I try to install and configure all software I would as if I was to use the system as an everyday machine circa 2000. It is a lot of work, but it is a pretty good test for stability. After everything is setup (Internet Explorer 6, Firefox, MS Office, Winamp, Quake, Photoshot, etc...), I like to let Winamp play full-scale mp3s on repeat for a day.

Hi!
For my understanding, I should use WT with 256MB, because else not all memory is cached?

Well, at the moment, my HOT-433 (Rev 1.x - 3.x) is fitted with:
Am486DX5-133V16BGC (133MHz @ 33 MHz FSB @ 3.3V)
2x Kingston 128MB Edo Memory (It's funny, that a single 128MB is fully detected)
Matrox G200 8MB (+8MB and DVI Module) PCI
NEC USB 2.0 Card
microHISCORE 3D (Voodoo1 6MB) PCI
RealMagic xCard (DVD,XVID-Decoder) PCI
Adaptec AHA-1542CF SCSI-Controller ISA (Plextor 40x is Connected and working)
Onboard IDE with a Seagate ST32122A (Cheap Drive, haven't anything else here)
3Com 3C515-TX 10/100 Network ISA
AWE64 Gold (+24MB Creative Memory Upgrade)

I don't know if SCSI over ISA is a good Idea 😉 It was the only SCSI-Card, which I had here now.

At least, its working stable with Win98SE for now. I had also once, that the board was acting wonky in the beginning. This changed for me after I flashed a newer BIOS and replaced the DALLAS with a new DS12887+ Module (I've installed a Socket for DALLAS, so it can be changed easily).

To be honest, i don't know exactly what I will be doing with this. For now, my focus is on multimedia/games.

Yes, if you want to use 256 MB of RAM, use L2 WT mode. If you want to use L2 WB mode, use 128 MB. I do not beleive this chipset requires memory to be installed in pairs. I have never tried single stick, 128 MB EDO modules on a 486 motherboard. I've always thought these boards were maxed out with 64 MB modules per SIMM.

Are you using the DVI connector? Any caviats using this? Where did you find it?

Overall, you seem to have a very nice setup. If I had to pick out one item to change, it would be to bring the hard drive off the onboard IDE and onto a PCI SCSI or Ultra ATA adapter. The PIO-mode IDE really bogs down the CPU.

Are you going to run this at 160 MHz?

Hi!
I am using it sometimes. Its really working fine. I've also upgraded a G400 Max with a DVI-Module in my K6-III+ 550 PC.
Found it years ago on eBay.

-> http://h18000.www1.hp.com/products/quickspecs … 1/10509_ca.HTML
I just see, that its not directly DVI. Its DFP. I am using a DFP->DVI-Cable. (The G400 Max has native DVI-connectors)

PCI SCSI sounds nice. But aren't the drives pretty loud? I would prefer to install a cf-card, so its passive.
My power supply is also passive (ATX attached with Switch and AT-Connectors, so it fits directly to a AT-Case with ATX) Looks like this: http://tinyurl.com/cotlp44

I would like to run at 160Mz, but the onboard IDE seems at the moment not to like it (e.g. command.com not found blah blah). So first, as you said, I need a better controller..

On my HOT-433 I have installed Windows 2000 SP4 and want to use as fast as possible PCI videocard. First I take GeForce 2MX400 PCI but I can see only videobios post and next reboot, and again reboot, and so on. Voodoo3 3000 PCI gives me a green screen on monitor and nothing else. Nvidia Riva TNT can give 16 colors and max resolution 800x600. I try different drivers but it do not helps me. Vga driver go in safe mode.

Only Matrox Millenium 2 PCI can work fine, but I want to something faster then it.
In what is the problem with PCI videocards on 486? And what is the faster VC somebody used without problems?

Why is this in the Emulation forum?

max1024, this study should answer most or all of your questions, Modern graphics on a 486 . Good luck!