That's only if he had a decent ss7 to help it out. You can't just stick a K6 in any S7 and expect miracles, much like trying to stick P3s in too early motherboards in hoping to prove a forum post wrong on the internet without checking where the multiplier, voltage and bus falls in line with what it supports

Well,okay.

On the other side,I changed the rig specs.Those are for now,until I can get an alternative that works for the HSF compound.

MB:Epox EP-4PLA3I Rev 1.1
CPU:Pentium 4 1.7,I've got three other CPUs though (a Celeron D 2.66,a Celeron 1.7GHz and a Celeron 1.8GHz)
10GB Seagate HDD(I plan on swapping it with my 80GB SATA drive at one point,I need to get a SATA cable though,and clone the contents to my 1TB Samsung drive I have around)
256MB RAM(planning on upgrading to 512,but the motherboard won't like one of my 256MB sticks even though it's PC3200 CL3.0)
same 400W PSU
same CD-ROM

This is what it has for now.Because of the old compound on the P4 1.7GHz being dry,I have to replace it with a alternative(as normal CPU compound isn't available at all here)so it won't freeze in the bios like it does now.
One thing I like at this board is that if I put my Celeron D,it shows a Celeron D logo,for P4 the Pentium 4 logo,and for the Celeron 1.7 just a white square with the Intel logo in it.

That's more like it.

Yeah,I really want to save this board.Just gave it a good cleaning now,I'll see if it makes difference.Also,installed the other 256MB stick,and now at least it shows DIMM at rows correctly.
This board also has a temp monitor that is shown whenever I boot the system,which helps me check CPU temps.

Back with another update.
The EPoX motherboard is now replaced.It has a Chaintech MPM800-000LE motherboard,and I have onboard graphics,even though I don't use them.(I will use this system for emulating games on my TV and such,and my Radeon 7000 AGP card works the best)

PcBytes wrote:

Small update regarding the P2:
I have given up on the P3,coming to the conclusion (after checking Stason too)that this board doesn't support Slot 1 P3s.No biggie,I'll try to get myself another Pentium 2 CPU and hide it inside the old 350MHz P2 case,and run XP again.After all,if it will work fine,I'll leave it as it will be.

If it's a 440BX board (which I assume to be the case since you're running a 100MHz FSB processor), then at the very least you should be able to get a P3-400 or 450 going on it. Might require a BIOS update, but it should work.

As for running XP on such a machine, I had an IBM Thinkpad 570 with a P2-333/192MB RAM at one point and ran XP on it myself. Wasn't great, but it ran well enough. Eventually I did switch it to Win2000 and the boost in speed was quite noticeable.

The BIOS doesn't support the CPU,and the BIOS is already updated.

Do XP on a Athlon Classic. These CPU's really shine in the gaming department, and my K6-2 600MHz kicks my PIII 633MHz PC's butt. That could be because it has 128MB more ram then the 256MB in the PIII, but who knows.

EDIT: ment to say socket 370 celeron. Whoops!

I have been thinking about that,and if I have luck I maybe build a 950MHz "Spitfire"Duron system.I gotta leave Intel to rest a bit.
Also,what markings do you have on your PCCHIPS board?I might be able to identify it somehow.

armankordi wrote:

Do XP on a Athlon Classic. These CPU's really shine in the gaming department, and my K6-2 600MHz kicks my PIII 633MHz PC's butt. That could be because it has 128MB more ram then the 256MB in the PIII, but who knows.

I might understand that if you said Celeron instead of Pentium III because the Celeron was hamstrung by the 66mhz bus for a long time back then but with 100/133mhz bus Pentium III would usually outperform K6-2 and III. It wouldn't be until Athlon that AMD pushed ahead of Katmai, but not Coppermine.

And now that I have looked it up, I don't see any speed of Pentium III between 600 and 650. Are you sure you don't have a Celeron?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Intel_Pe … microprocessors

I do see a Celeron 633 on this list

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Intel_Ce … microprocessors

The 600MHz Pentium 3 exists on Slot 1:
http://www.cpu-world.com/CPUs/Pentium-III/Int … U600512%29.html
Same for the 650MHz Pentium 3,except it's on Socket 370:
http://www.cpu-world.com/CPUs/Pentium-III/Int … 650256E%29.html

Okay.I have some good news and bad news.
Good News 1:I found 2 good CPUs while digging through motherboards: Pentium 4 1.7GHz and Pentium 3 933MHz.
Good News 2:The 933MHz CPU is working,as I used my old IBM GA-6WMMC7-E1 motherboard to test it and I was greeted by the IBM logo.

The Bad News:I got a MSI P4MAM-V,but it's not working.It refuses to turn on by the power switch,thus I have to power it using the green and black trick on the ATX cable,and it also doesn't POST at all.Wish it would have worked though,as I've got a nice logo to put in place of the boring "V-Series"logo:

Is this bootscreen supposed to be funny? Because I don't get it. No, seriously, I don't.

What I read from that picture is "I enjoy Teen Titans 'hentai' flash games.... and old processors that lack cache."

leileilol wrote:

What I read from that picture is "I enjoy Teen Titans 'hentai' flash games.... and old processors that lack cache."

First,I don't know what she is doing,as I didn't know about ZONE until now.The only things I saw from her was one news episode on Youtube(which I use as a video source for Skrillex remixes and such)and a music video(which I also use on remixes like Party Rock Anthem or Skrillex-Kill Everybody on Sony Vegas 11).
Second,I didn't know the Celeron D is cacheless.The only cacheless CPU I know was the first Celeron (233 or 266)on Slot 1.
And here's my question:Considering that my CPU may be cacheless,will it affect performance of the system in any kind?Last time I used the CPU it was running as fast as my Semrpon 3400+ on AM2.Celeron D is Socket 478 by the way.

RacoonRider wrote:

Is this bootscreen supposed to be funny? Because I don't get it. No, seriously, I don't.

I dunno.....maybe?

PcBytes wrote:

leileilol wrote:

What I read from that picture is "I enjoy Teen Titans 'hentai' flash games.... and old processors that lack cache."

First,I don't know what she is doing,as I didn't know about ZONE until now.The only things I saw from her was one news episode on Youtube(which I use as a video source for Skrillex remixes and such)and a music video(which I also use on remixes like Party Rock Anthem or Skrillex-Kill Everybody on Sony Vegas 11).

You try so hard to cover it up that I think you were actually looking for something more saucy 😁

PcBytes wrote:

I didn't know the Celeron D is cacheless.The only cacheless CPU I know was the first Celeron (233 or 266)on Slot 1.

There was no way intel could pull out such a trick again - the last time they did it they lost a huge part their market to AMD. No one inclined there was no cache at all, btw, http://www.cpu-world.com/CPUs/Celeron_D/ Still, it was not enough for Core 2 Duo era.

RacoonRider wrote:

You try so hard to cover it up that I think you were actually looking for something more saucy 😁

I don't.It really is the first time I hear about "ZONE".
Until I found it I was only going on Vogons,TPU (TechPowerUp),ASSEMbler,badcaps.net./mlp/,and most of the stuff I was searching was PS1/PS2/Xbox/Wii modding(yes I have a Wii 😀 ),YTPMVs,MUGEN (free fighting platform that you can customize) and such.
First time I saw her was on this YTPMV compilation: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NYZyP8fy4TU
The actual reason I watched that video was because of Snoop Dogg,RED ZONE,Hall of The Mountain King (first video)

RacoonRider wrote:

There was no way intel could pull out such a trick again - the last time they did it they lost a huge part their market to AMD. No one inclined there was no cache at all, btw, http://www.cpu-world.com/CPUs/Celeron_D/ Still, it was not enough for Core 2 Duo era.

Yet why they did that to the first Slot 1 Celeron?It doesn't make any sense.

PcBytes, no one will answer you better than Redhill 😀
http://redhill.net.au/c/c-9.html

RacoonRider wrote:

PcBytes, no one will answer you better than Redhill 😀
http://redhill.net.au/c/c-9.html

Now another thing comes here:if Intel had ALL the necessary things to do it,as they did the Pentium 2 266 and 300MHz,then why they did make a such failure of a CPU without L2 cache?Those Celerons without L2 cache are exactly a 386-486 for ATX motherboards probably.

PcBytes wrote:

RacoonRider wrote:

PcBytes, no one will answer you better than Redhill 😀
http://redhill.net.au/c/c-9.html

Now another thing comes here:if Intel had ALL the necessary things to do it,as they did the Pentium 2 266 and 300MHz,then why they did make a such failure of a CPU without L2 cache?Those Celerons without L2 cache are exactly a 386-486 for ATX motherboards probably.

What can I say? It was a failure of a greedy capitalist 😁