Vision Technology 486G motherboard with SIS 471 chipset.

486 MOTHERBOARD - SIS 486 G 3.3
SIS 486G 3.3/5V Rev:G,H Motherboard

- AWARD BIOS string 10/21/94-SiS-85C471B/E/G-2C4i9F30-00
- AWARD BIOS string 12/23/94-SIS-85C471B/E/G-2C4I9000-00
- 2-72 pin SIMM slots (1-128meg FPM DRAM)
- 4-30 pin SIMM slots
- 3-32bit VESA Local Bus slots
- 7-16bit ISA slots
- 64k-1024k CACHE support in 8-32pin sockets + 1 TAG RAM socket
- AWARD 1994-95 Auto-Detect BIOS.
- Supports LBA Mode Control & Large Disk DOS Compatibility.
- Green PC Connector
- SiS 85C471 9510 st 1994 chipset
- Supports 3.3v/5volt CPU's
- ZIF CPU socket 3 which supports these processors:
INTEL 80486SX/SX2,80486DX/DX2/DX4,P24D, SL80486SX/DX/DX2
CYRIX CX486S(M6),CX486DX/DX2(M7)
AMD AM486DX/DX2,AM486DXL2,AMDX4-120WB (AMD5x86)
- Supports speeds of 20/25/33/40/50/66/75/100 MHz.
- Manufactured by: Full Yes, Ably Tech and Vision Technologies

Just curious: was there ever any real benefit from >256KB cache sizes?

schlang wrote:

Just curious: was there ever any real benefit from >256KB cache sizes?

128 MB of RAM.

schlang wrote:

Just curious: was there ever any real benefit from >256KB cache sizes?

About 1-2% in benchmarks.
But if you wish to add a lot of ram, you need increase cache size - 256 kb cashed only 32mb ram in WB mode and 64 in WT mode.

Yes but back in the day we ran pentiums with 16 or 32mb if we had the money and always worked out fine.
I think 32 to 64 is just enough for any 486 system.

smeezekitty wrote:

schlang wrote:

Just curious: was there ever any real benefit from >256KB cache sizes?

128 MB of RAM.

I've always wondered how a 486 could benefit from 128MB RAM.

bushwack wrote:

smeezekitty wrote:

schlang wrote:

Just curious: was there ever any real benefit from >256KB cache sizes?

128 MB of RAM.

I've always wondered how a 486 could benefit from 128MB RAM.

Windows 98 or especially 2000. I plan on trying 512 cache and 128 RAM soon

Or RAM drives and disk cache 😉

Ah, a 486 and 2000. Makes perfect sense now. 🤣

bushwack wrote:

Ah, a 486 and 2000. Makes perfect sense now. 🤣

Don't bash it until you try it. Takes a while to boot buts its very stable

smeezekitty wrote:

bushwack wrote:

Ah, a 486 and 2000. Makes perfect sense now. 🤣

Don't bash it until you try it. Takes a while to boot buts its very stable

No bashing, so all about stability huh? That's all anyone had to say.
I'm a gamer type, so in my mind that setup is less then optimal. Guess you guys are running servers huh?

No. But I find crashing pretty annoying.

I can also watch youtube videos and play Simcity 3000 on it 😀

Not ultra quick though

smeezekitty wrote:

No. But I find crashing pretty annoying.

I can also watch youtube videos and play Simcity 3000 on it 😀

Not ultra quick though

How on earth do you get YouTube videos to play smoothly on a 486? I can't even get them to do that properly with XP, 768 MB of RAM and a 1.1 GHz Duron!

smeezekitty wrote:

No. But I find crashing pretty annoying.

I can also watch youtube videos and play Simcity 3000 on it 😀

Not ultra quick though

I don't think the words "486", "Windows 2000", "Youtube" and "quick" can ever co-exist in the same sentence 😜.

I have a top-of-the-line P4 that is struggling with Youtube. A 486 is barely enough for MP3 playback. Color me skeptical.

oerk wrote:

I have a top-of-the-line P4 that is struggling with Youtube. A 486 is barely enough for MP3 playback. Color me skeptical.

Same with me. Top Athlon XP, 1.5Gb, youtube barely works.

You can play Youtube videos on a 486 with win98 and firefox 2.0 at ~2fps, but WHY would you ever do that?

Well, i guess this is nothing new for some members here but for computers too old and slow for youtube videos (Durons and early pentiuns 4 and most of the pentiuns 3), a youtube to vlc plugin for firefox or chrome works like wonders!

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addo … utube-shortcut/ (firefox)

You only need to have vlc installed (obviously) and then right click the youtube video you want to watch and click "Play video from link". I was able to play most youtube videos quite well on old slugish computers, as long yo don't have anything else eating your cpu in background up to 100%.

As for youtube on a 486, even 2 fps is quite optimistic, and i'm talking about this "youtube to vlc" solution. I don't even want to think what a flash video would do to the poor 486.

RacoonRider wrote:

oerk wrote:

I have a top-of-the-line P4 that is struggling with Youtube. A 486 is barely enough for MP3 playback. Color me skeptical.

Same with me. Top Athlon XP, 1.5Gb, youtube barely works.

Same here, I have both an Athelon X64 and a Hyper Threaded 3ghz Pentium 4 that both are almost unusable for youtube and I have linux on both of them so when not on the internet they are zippy and responsive. As soon as I tell them to start using youtube of some other modern webpage it gets pretty slow.

I am not using flash because A. version 9+ needs MMX instructions when playing 9+ content and B it is very VERY slow.

Yeah even a P3/P4 which shouldn't have a problem struggles