Why not use a CF IDE Adapter as a HDD replacement?

rodimus80 wrote:

Why not use a CF IDE Adapter as a HDD replacement?

I love the sound of my mechanical HDD's. (p.s, I don't have any CF adapters!)

I've always wondered why the SIMM modules sometimes had very big RAM chips (in your case the 8MB modules) while before that and afterwards the RAM chips had the normal size? Those very large chips always are 2MB each so it's easy to count the amount of memory on those modules.

From the photo's it looks like your Socket 7 board uses an Intel chipset, which most of the time could only cache 64MB of RAM.

Also the "Burn-in" on the BIOS chip and the name "Matsonic" sound a lot like PC-Chips to me, but if the board works well, then I suppose all is oke 😀

And thanks for the pics, we all love pics 😁

Nice build, I like the AT case having not the usual 2 but 3 5.25in slots, those are a lot less common then standard AT tower cases are (or at least, I've come across way fewer of those then those with 2 5.25in slots).

So what are you using your rig for? And how does it work out for you?

armankordi wrote:

rodimus80 wrote:

Why not use a CF IDE Adapter as a HDD replacement?

I love the sound of my mechanical HDD's. (p.s, I don't have any CF adapters!)

CF to IDE adapters are VERY cheap on eBay...I just purchased 2 from China for about $4.

Might be good to have a couple handy even though you prefer mechanical drives. It won't set you back much.

Tetrium wrote:

From the photo's it looks like your Socket 7 board uses an Intel chipset, which most of the time could only cache 64MB of RAM.

To be more precise, the only Socket 7 Intel PCI chipset which could cache more than 64MB was the 430HX. 430FX, 430VX and 430TX could only cache 64MB.
I can see DIMM slots on the photo. Although EDO DIMM modules exist these are probably meant for SDRAM modules which are only supported by VX and TX.
Check the chipset to see if you should remove the smaller RAM modules.
PMMX 233 is nice, fastest Intel CPU for Socket 7, good compatibility.
I can't see a sound card?
You might want to look for a different video card, although that depends on what games you want to play. A Trident 96xx should have decent compatibility, it's just not too fast. You should probably wait and see if games run fast enough for you.
If you still have the 1MB ISA Trident I would keep that, might be useful if you want to slow down games.

idspispopd wrote:

To be more precise, the only Socket 7 Intel PCI chipset which could cache more than 64MB was the 430HX. 430FX, 430VX and 430TX c […]
Show full quote

Tetrium wrote:

From the photo's it looks like your Socket 7 board uses an Intel chipset, which most of the time could only cache 64MB of RAM.

To be more precise, the only Socket 7 Intel PCI chipset which could cache more than 64MB was the 430HX. 430FX, 430VX and 430TX could only cache 64MB.
I can see DIMM slots on the photo. Although EDO DIMM modules exist these are probably meant for SDRAM modules which are only supported by VX and TX.
Check the chipset to see if you should remove the smaller RAM modules.
PMMX 233 is nice, fastest Intel CPU for Socket 7, good compatibility.
I can't see a sound card?
You might want to look for a different video card, although that depends on what games you want to play. A Trident 96xx should have decent compatibility, it's just not too fast. You should probably wait and see if games run fast enough for you.
If you still have the 1MB ISA Trident I would keep that, might be useful if you want to slow down games.

The board can support about ~128MB of ram when I filled the SDRAM with my 32MB modules, and left 32MB in EDO.
Ah, yes I've been using the machine for good old DOS and early 90's games like DOOM and even BUILD engine games like Duke Nukem.
The sound card is a CMI8330 Built-into the motherboard, but I have a soundblaster 128PCI that I might use, and I might even put in a Voodoo1. I never threw away the components, only the disk. The PC Is running...

The fan bearings for either the PSU or the CPU fan is going bad, going to have to look into that (the CPU bearings must be bad, that thing runs so fast.)

Tetrium wrote:

I've always wondered why the SIMM modules sometimes had very big RAM chips (in your case the 8MB modules) while before that and […]
Show full quote

I've always wondered why the SIMM modules sometimes had very big RAM chips (in your case the 8MB modules) while before that and afterwards the RAM chips had the normal size? Those very large chips always are 2MB each so it's easy to count the amount of memory on those modules.

From the photo's it looks like your Socket 7 board uses an Intel chipset, which most of the time could only cache 64MB of RAM.

Also the "Burn-in" on the BIOS chip and the name "Matsonic" sound a lot like PC-Chips to me, but if the board works well, then I suppose all is oke 😀

And thanks for the pics, we all love pics 😁

Nice build, I like the AT case having not the usual 2 but 3 5.25in slots, those are a lot less common then standard AT tower cases are (or at least, I've come across way fewer of those then those with 2 5.25in slots).

So what are you using your rig for? And how does it work out for you?

The machine is used for 80's to late 90's games. QUAKE runs at a decent pace, but Half Life just died when I tried to play it. Looking for 3D accelerators, as the only one I have is the Radeon 7000.
The LAN adapter is used with my actual desktop(Win7x64Pro/Win7Ultimatex86)(OMG WINDOWS 98 CAN DO THAT?) so I can share files through the network, with my 1 Windows XP PC, and my Windows 2000 PC. The PC runs at a decent pace, when I got the PC it was very, VERY sluggish, even after I put in the new RAM! (maybe the quantum disk was failing)

armankordi wrote:

The board can support about ~128MB of ram when I filled the SDRAM with my 32MB modules, and left 32MB in EDO.
Ah, yes I've been using the machine for good old DOS and early 90's games like DOOM and even BUILD engine games like Duke Nukem.
The sound card is a CMI8330 Built-into the motherboard, but I have a soundblaster 128PCI that I might use, and I might even put in a Voodoo1. I never threw away the components, only the disk. The PC Is running...

I don't really understand what you are saying about the RAM.
Anyway, I wasn't talking about how much RAM is supported, but how much RAM will get cached.
If the board really takes SDRAM it has a VX or TX chipset and your system will slow down if you put more than 64MB in it.

The performance should be fine for DOOM, also for Duke Nukem (which would run better with a faster video card of course, depending on the resolution).

Regarding the sound: I don't know the CMI chip, if it works for DOS you could leave it for the moment. If you want to upgrade I would look for an ISA card, though.

A Voodoo1 would be a good match.

armankordi wrote:

The machine is used for 80's to late 90's games. QUAKE runs at a decent pace, but Half Life just died when I tried to play it. Looking for 3D accelerators, as the only one I have is the Radeon 7000.

Quake in software mode with the Trident PCI card? I suppose that will be acceptable but not great.
The Radeon 7000 should work, you could just try it. It should also enhance performance in DOS, although the compatibility is probably word, especially for older DOS games.
For Direct3D/OpenGL it is probably not a bad match for a Pentium MMX.
(I have seen a PCI Radeon card which didn't work in an 430HX Intel mainboard. But it is still worth a try if you have the card.)

armankordi wrote:

The board can support about ~128MB of ram when I filled the SDRAM with my 32MB modules, and left 32MB in EDO.

Many boards of that age did not support the simultaneous use of SIMM and DIMM modules though. You might end up frying your DIMM's, just fyi

Tetrium wrote:

armankordi wrote:

The board can support about ~128MB of ram when I filled the SDRAM with my 32MB modules, and left 32MB in EDO.

Many boards of that age did not support the simultaneous use of SIMM and DIMM modules though. You might end up frying your DIMM's, just fyi

OK, Thanks for the advice.
How can I increase the FSB speeds?

idspispopd wrote:

I don't really understand what you are saying about the RAM. Anyway, I wasn't talking about how much RAM is supported, but how m […]
Show full quote

armankordi wrote:

The board can support about ~128MB of ram when I filled the SDRAM with my 32MB modules, and left 32MB in EDO.
Ah, yes I've been using the machine for good old DOS and early 90's games like DOOM and even BUILD engine games like Duke Nukem.
The sound card is a CMI8330 Built-into the motherboard, but I have a soundblaster 128PCI that I might use, and I might even put in a Voodoo1. I never threw away the components, only the disk. The PC Is running...

I don't really understand what you are saying about the RAM.
Anyway, I wasn't talking about how much RAM is supported, but how much RAM will get cached.
If the board really takes SDRAM it has a VX or TX chipset and your system will slow down if you put more than 64MB in it.

The performance should be fine for DOOM, also for Duke Nukem (which would run better with a faster video card of course, depending on the resolution).

Regarding the sound: I don't know the CMI chip, if it works for DOS you could leave it for the moment. If you want to upgrade I would look for an ISA card, though.

A Voodoo1 would be a good match.

armankordi wrote:

The machine is used for 80's to late 90's games. QUAKE runs at a decent pace, but Half Life just died when I tried to play it. Looking for 3D accelerators, as the only one I have is the Radeon 7000.

Quake in software mode with the Trident PCI card? I suppose that will be acceptable but not great.
The Radeon 7000 should work, you could just try it. It should also enhance performance in DOS, although the compatibility is probably word, especially for older DOS games.
For Direct3D/OpenGL it is probably not a bad match for a Pentium MMX.
(I have seen a PCI Radeon card which didn't work in an 430HX Intel mainboard. But it is still worth a try if you have the card.)

Thanks for the advice. What I mean to say with the RAM is I used 80MB of DIMM's and 32MB SIMM's. I'm getting Win98 drivers for the card, and trying it.

armankordi wrote:

Tetrium wrote:

armankordi wrote:

The board can support about ~128MB of ram when I filled the SDRAM with my 32MB modules, and left 32MB in EDO.

Many boards of that age did not support the simultaneous use of SIMM and DIMM modules though. You might end up frying your DIMM's, just fyi

OK, Thanks for the advice.
How can I increase the FSB speeds?

I don't think that this is necessary, the system seems to be quite balanced. And with an Intel chipset overclocking the FSB means also overclocking the PCI bus which might give problems, depending on the PCI cards and the hard drive (potential data corruption).
If you really want to try this you should probably use SDRAM (DIMM) only, I think those work better with higher speeds.

Changing the FSB usually works with either jumpers or dip switches on the mainboard, or it could be a BIOS setting.
If there are jumpers or dip switches on the mainboard you can search for an imprinted table on the mainboard which tells you the meaning of the settings. If there is no such table you'd better find a manual for the board, or look if you can find the board at stason.org.

armankordi wrote:

Thanks for the advice. What I mean to say with the RAM is I used 80MB of DIMM's and 32MB SIMM's. I'm getting Win98 drivers for the card, and trying it.

I'd try if the system boots with the card first. If it doesn't you won't need the drivers.

About the RAM again: I wanted to write the same as Tetrium, you shouldn't mix SIMM and DIMM modules. I don't know if anything can still be fried if it's already running with both, but I wouldn't risk it. Besides as I wrote the system might even get slower with more than 64 MB so it wouldn't even be worth it. Did you check the chipset yet?

I have checked the chipset: a Intel 430TX chipset.

Citation: http://www.baber.com/baber/411/matsonic_ms5025s.htm

It seems that the board doesn't support changing the FSB. No Jumpers for that. The BIOS has a "CPU Speed" setting but I suppose this will at best change the multiplier, and there is no higher multiplier for an PMMX 233.

Since it's a 430TX chipset you should definitely reduce the RAM to 64MB.
The chapter on memory installation in the manual is also important to read:

The mainboard lets you add up to 256MB of system memory through SIMM and DIMM sockets on the board. Four SIMM sockets on the mainboard are divided into two banks: Bank 0 and Bank 1. Each bank consists of two 72-pin SIMM modules, and three 168-pin DIMM sockets are divided into three banks: Bank 0, Bank 1, and Bank 2. The mainboard supports

Bank 0 SIMM1 & SIMM2 (72-pin SIMM) DIMM1 (168-pin DIMM) [size of modules ...]
Bank 1 SIMM3 & SIMM4 (72-pin SIMM) DIMM2 (168-pin DIMM)
Bank 2 DIMM3 (168-pin DIMM)

Notes:
1. SIMM3 & 4 and DIMM2, or, SIMM1 & 2 and DIMM1, these two types of DRAM module can not be used at the same time.
2. The speed of all SIMMs and DIMM modules have to be faster than 70ns.
3. Use 2 DRAM types: Fast Page Mode or Extend DATA Out (EDO) for SIMM socket.
4. Use 3 DRAM types: Fast Page Mode, Extend Data Out (EDO), or synchronous DRAM (SDRAM) for DIMM socket.
5. The function of Bank 2 will not be available while using the 64 Mbit type of SDRAM in any DIMM slots.

I have a PC-chips m572 and it is quite a great board. It is jumper-free and has fsb and multiplier settings of 66 to 83.3 and 1.5x to 6x respectively, and also lets you set the vcore manually (from 2.2v? up to 3.7). I have a 166 MMX@290 on it (83.3*3.5; 3.1 vcore) and it works wonders.

By the way, from experience messing around with a single 256mb double sided Pc133 C2 stick, I don't think I ever saw a performance decrease when timedemoing GLQuake and other games by using it instead of a 64mb stick

subhuman@xgtx wrote:

By the way, from experience messing around with a single 256mb double sided Pc133 C2 stick, I don't think I ever saw a performance decrease when timedemoing GLQuake and other games by using it instead of a 64mb stick

That's very well possible. You will only see a performance decrease if you really use more than 64MB which is not necessarily the case. IIRC GLQuake required 24MB of RAM in Windows 95. And Quake is very cache efficient anyway, it works very much from L1 cache.
If you really want to check this out you could load you system with some programs which gobble up memory but don't tax the CPU, or scan the hd to fill the disk cache, and bench again,
(Assuming you are not bottlenecked by the video card.)
And of course uncached RAM is still better than swapping to disk so if you intend to run XP more RAM would still be faster. (Still won't run very well, of course.)

EDIT:
Of course this topic has come up before:
Memory size, cacheable range and performance. Socket 5/7

Skyscraper wrote:

The diffrence between 64 mb fully cached memory and no cached memory at all (using the 512mb seen as 256mb module) with the l2 cache disabled in the bios is 7-8%.
GLQuake timedemo only loses a single fps 59 vs 58 fps.

subhuman@xgtx wrote:

I have a PC-chips m572 and it is quite a great board. It is jumper-free and has fsb and multiplier settings of 66 to 83.3 and 1.5x to 6x respectively, and also lets you set the vcore manually (from 2.2v? up to 3.7). I have a 166 MMX@290 on it (83.3*3.5; 3.1 vcore) and it works wonders.

By the way, from experience messing around with a single 256mb double sided Pc133 C2 stick, I don't think I ever saw a performance decrease when timedemoing GLQuake and other games by using it instead of a 64mb stick

That's interesting... too bad my board can't clock up.