I think for anyone looking to run older DOS games on a PII system a Celeron 266 might be the CPU you want. These were the ones with no cache memory so they run really slowly which is what you want so your DOS games don't run like they're on crack.

sliderider wrote:

I think for anyone looking to run older DOS games on a PII system a Celeron 266 might be the CPU you want. These were the ones with no cache memory so they run really slowly which is what you want so your DOS games don't run like they're on crack.

After all those pages, I am somewhat surprised to read such a suggestion. Why would one limit itself to one locked CPU. If I want the functionality of a Celeron 266, I set fsb 66, multi 4x and external cache off in bios. I don't even have to open the case for it.

Seriously, a P2 333 or P2 400 is the most versatile choice. Instead of 266 MHz you can also pick 133 MHz. Try that with a Celeron.

ux-3 wrote:

Seriously, a P2 333 or P2 400 is the most versatile choice. Instead of 266 MHz you can also pick 133 MHz.

Are you saying there are unlocked/limited P2 333 and 400s?

AdamP wrote:

ux-3 wrote:

Seriously, a P2 333 or P2 400 is the most versatile choice. Instead of 266 MHz you can also pick 133 MHz.

Are you saying there are unlocked/limited P2 333 and 400s?

I'am not sure about the 333 and 400 MHz version, but I have a LX Board that runs a P2 266 at 133 MHz. Though the BIOS reports some odd frequency, you have to check the real speed with ctcm7r or anything similar.

AdamP wrote:

ux-3 wrote:

Seriously, a P2 333 or P2 400 is the most versatile choice. Instead of 266 MHz you can also pick 133 MHz.

Are you saying there are unlocked/limited P2 333 and 400s?

argh... please go back to the very first reply of this topic and start again from there. 😖

gerwin wrote:

AdamP wrote:

ux-3 wrote:

Seriously, a P2 333 or P2 400 is the most versatile choice. Instead of 266 MHz you can also pick 133 MHz.

Are you saying there are unlocked/limited P2 333 and 400s?

argh... please go back to the very first reply of this topic and start again from there. 😖

Of course... Tetrium has a SL2S7 and a SL2QF which are both unlocked. As the SL2QF is a 66mhz fsb Deschutes I might try that if I can find one cheap.

Is there any way to see exactly when a P2 was produced? As far as I can tell, it's in the 2D Matrix Mark.

@Gerwin:

Did you read my post about the sporadic unlock of my multi-limited P2-400. There must be some truth about those reports, I have seen this myself happening. I just can't reproduce it. If abit cares to make it a bios feature, why should it not work. It never gained popularity cause Intel put the lid on it in 9830 - so the abit feature found no more use.

@AdamP: Iirc, for MALAY CPUS, line two, first four digits.

ux-3 wrote:

@Gerwin:
Did you read my post about the sporadic unlock of my multi-limited P2-400. There must be some truth about those reports, I have seen this myself happening. I just can't reproduce it. If abit cares to make it a bios feature, why should it not work. It never gained popularity cause Intel put the lid on it in 9830 - so the abit feature found no more use.

So the theory is that under some circumstances the CPU can accept all defined multipliers (does that mean 5.5x max?) I already concluded it was FSB-speed related, but cannot say much more about yet. I only have a P-II 333, no 350 or 400 to test.
Most important is that each of the three semi-unlocked deschutes will offer a range of 133 to 350 or 400 MHz. Which remains so even when the multipliers refuse to go above their default.
Why do you want the multipliers above that released? is it because you want the top speed to be 4.5x100MHz? just curious.

ux-3 wrote:

sliderider wrote:

I think for anyone looking to run older DOS games on a PII system a Celeron 266 might be the CPU you want. These were the ones with no cache memory so they run really slowly which is what you want so your DOS games don't run like they're on crack.

After all those pages, I am somewhat surprised to read such a suggestion. Why would one limit itself to one locked CPU. If I want the functionality of a Celeron 266, I set fsb 66, multi 4x and external cache off in bios. I don't even have to open the case for it.

Seriously, a P2 333 or P2 400 is the most versatile choice. Instead of 266 MHz you can also pick 133 MHz. Try that with a Celeron.

And here I thought the purpose of these forums was to get old DOS games to run at normal speeds on newer hardware. Silly me. 😖

gerwin wrote:

So the theory is that under some circumstances the CPU can accept all defined multipliers (does that mean 5.5x max?).

Not quite! I have taken my P2-400 three times into this unlocked state, where I could enter the bios, change the multi or fsb at will as long as I used ctrl-alt-del and not reset or power button. I could run at 500 MHz @ fsb100. I ended these states by trying the 1.5x and 5.5x multi. The systems hangs and needs a reset.

I have never seen a P2 run at 5.5x. My own P2-333 doesn't run at 5.5x either. I doubt this multi even exists. What evidence do we have for its existance?

Most important is that each of the three semi-unlocked deschutes will offer a range of 133 to 350 or 400 MHz. Which remains so even when the multipliers refuse to go above their default.

Yes, and that is the main reason why I haven't yet taken the soldering iron to try something more dramatic with a disposable MB. Even if limited to 4x, I can reach 133MHz to 448MHz from bios.

Why do you want the multipliers above that released? is it because you want the top speed to be 4.5x100MHz? just curious.

We both know that 450+ can be done by fsb too. No, I am curious as to why my p2 acts differently from tetriums. I doubt they are any different.

sliderider wrote:

And here I thought the purpose of these forums was to get old DOS games to run at normal speeds on newer hardware. Silly me. 😖

You got the purpose right but you seem to have difficulty seeing the most flexible solution.

ux-3 wrote:

I have never seen a P2 run at 5.5x. My own P2-333 doesn't run at 5.5x either. I doubt this multi even exists. What evidence do we have for its existance?

My mistake, I have been typing 5.5x where I should type 5.0x. My 333 MHz protests on multipliers 1.5x and 5.5x as if they are out of range/undefined.

My 400 boots with a 5.5x multi just fine (66mhz fsb). Maybe it's the combination of a certain CPU with a certain motherboard?
I haven't had the time yet to test my unlockables in another motherboard, today I was busy cleaning the stack of 'new' computer cases that have been piling up during the last couple months since Queensday so I can get them out of the way, so to say (along with scrapping an equal amount of lesser computer cases).
I've got so much untested stuff to test, I got a stack of kiwiboxes about a meter high with motherboards, graphics cards and whatsnot. heck, I made 7 new cpu trays and all are filled already with either new aquisitions or stuff that needed proper storing for a long time!

When I have time I will try the unlockables out in 1 or 2 other boards as I am interested in these results myself 😉

So they may actually be different. I will have to get some more then...

I read back a little, and found a good observation on multiplier 5.5x:
Slowing a 440BX based PC, multiplier 5.5x

gerwin wrote:

I read back a little, and found a good observation on multiplier 5.5x:
Slowing a 440BX based PC, multiplier 5.5x

Well, look at Tetriums first pic in this thread. If the bios doesn't lie, the thing runs at 5.5x too. I guess I will have to solder...

Ofcourse I can't be certain for 100% that the 5.5x multi is for real. I can only tell that I see no indication that it's not real. A 6.0x multi would not work, even though the cpu itself should be able to work at 400mhz so imo theres something up with the multipliers themselves.
The 5.5x multi was available on only 1 of my 2 semi-unlocked ones and all testing was done on a single motherboard. I got plenty other BX boards to test but I just haven't had the time yet, atm I got other priorities like 'processing' my new computer cases (cleaning up which I always do thoroughly), stripping junk cases before I toss em out and testing + sorting all the new hardware I've accumulated in the last 4-odd months.

I will test the semi-unlocked ones once I start testing motherboards and will report back here 😉

gerwin wrote:

I read back a little, and found a good observation on multiplier 5.5x:
Slowing a 440BX based PC, multiplier 5.5x

Oh, and did you see which board he got the 5.5x in? 😉

Well, my SL2U6 was produced in week 40 1998 - way past the locking date.

My SL2S5 and SL2HE were both produced in Ireland, so I don't know when they were produced.

I've also managed to get my SL2HE down to 133mhz. The L2 cache is also disabled and the bios now identifies the cpu as a Celeron. (Although Windows and Cpu-z still identify it as a Pentium II, and yes, I know that the first Celerons were just Pentium IIs without L2 cache). Does anyone know why the L2 cache is disabled at x2? (Apologies if that's already been answered, but I couldn't find one) It wasn't disabled at x2.5 (166mhz). I thought it was supposed to be disabled at both x2 and x2.5?

Why is the L2 disabled at all I wonder?
If it runs at 1/2 the speed of the processor, would it make any difference being enabled at 66MHz vs disabled entirely?

Oh, and did you see which board he got the 5.5x in?

Ok, so not sure if that was a genuine question (confusing tone/smiley), but anyways...
I did mention the mobo(s) in my first post in that thread(on page2), namely Abit BH6.
(with various bios versions)