Ive seen that ALD motherboard mentioned before on this site and far as I know we dont have any performance figures for it, I wonder if anyone from here bought it?

Was a late 90s desgin If I recall or even built in the 2000s?

WOuld love to see performance of this motherboard.

What a damn shame we don't have the ebay thread anymore would have been the perfect item listing for 486 enthusiasts.

In all probability I presume the bios would be limited and you wouldn't extract maximum peformance from the cache and ram.

feipoa wrote:

tpowell.ca wrote:

... hope to be the fastest PCI S3 possible and ...

I did get the GF2 working on this motherboard. Wouldn't that be the fastest possible card for this motherboard?

Well, keep in mind that I'm not looking for 3D performance but 2D DOS and VESA game compatibility.
For early 3D stuff I'll use my K6-III+. 😀

Also, is it me or does the Cyrix 5x86 have compatibility issues with some software? I can't recall which exactly but the AMD 5x86 never missed a beat.

5x86 never missed a beat

It's just overclocked 486DX4 with power saving features.

Wouldn't that be the fastest possible card for this motherboard?

Quadro4 100 NVS PCI aka GeForce 4 MX440 should work too.

Eleanor1967 wrote:

Well recently this motherboard sold on ebay (not my auction): […]
Show full quote

feipoa wrote:

Pipeline burst on a socket 3? I don't think so. [...]

Well recently this motherboard sold on ebay (not my auction):

https://www.ebay.de/itm/ALD-PCI5411-PCI-ISA-5 … =p2047675.l2557

According to the documentation of the chipset, it does atleast support pipeline burst l2 cache.

http://www.aldtech.com/products/chips/93c488/c488spec.pdf

The chipset manual does indeed claim to support pipelined burst cache, but that partiular board has zero L2 cache fitted. Normally the ALD boards have 256kb asynchronous singled bank cache soldered to the board, which appear to accept 512kb singled bank if you are in the mood to solder. About 7 years ago, I do remember finding an ALD board with what appeared to be pipelined burst cache modules fitted, however as the board quality looked like crap, I just assumed it was fake. What's weird is that I actually bookmarked the link, but later when I went to have a peek to see if it was still available it had been replaced with a different ALD board with 256kb cache.

I have a Lucky Star LS-486 mobo with PCI slots and 256kb cache.
Intel DX4-100

The Serpent Rider wrote:

It's just overclocked 486DX4 with power saving features. […]
Show full quote

5x86 never missed a beat

It's just overclocked 486DX4 with power saving features.

Wouldn't that be the fastest possible card for this motherboard?

Quadro4 100 NVS PCI aka GeForce 4 MX440 should work too.

I wouldn't call a 5x86 from AMD overclocked, just an appropriately clocked 486 with an actual 4x multiplier and write-back cache. In the same way a DX4 is not an overclocked DX/DX2. Although I'm sure that's what you meant.

How are nVidia cards with respect to old DOS game compatibility, VESA modes, smooth scrolling and analog output quality?

feipoa wrote:

I don't know of any OEM which mentioned running a 486-100 on a 50 MHz bus. Are you able to provide this literature? From what I recall, the 486 DX50 had stability problems, so I would be really surprised if someone attempted a 486 DX2-100.

The ad that I saw was probably in PC Computing (or maybe it was a review). I also thought I remembered it being an IBM with PCI so I searched and found a listing of ValuePoint models with a processor option referred to as 486DX4 50/100MHz

see here: http://www.elhvb.com/mobokive/eprm/eprm/386.htm
found a PC Mag ad: https://books.google.com/books?id=fy_G-xlQbE8 … S-rA3wQ6AEIMDAH

My understanding is that when the 486DX-50 was initially released it proved problematic to design a stable system around. But plenty of later boards support 50MHz bus even though no more CPUs were released that required it (of course some could use either 50 or 33).

Interesting, so 6484-X.. and 6494-X.. model number prefixes are listed to have the DX4 50/100. I am doubtful that many were sold, but it would be interesting to hear from someone who may have owned one of these. I wonder what they did with the PCI clock. They probably halved it, which would make using the 50 MHz bus rather useless. No doubt, the extra wait states needed for cache and possibly RAM would also offer no overall advantage. If, however, they managed to use a 2/3 implementation for the FSB, then it might not be so cripple. However, from all the boards I've tested, at 50 Mhz, wait states are needed which lead to no advantage of the higher FSB.

tpowell.ca wrote:

I wouldn't call a 5x86 from AMD overclocked, just an appropriately clocked 486 with an actual 4x multiplier and write-back cache […]
Show full quote

The Serpent Rider wrote:

It's just overclocked 486DX4 with power saving features. […]
Show full quote

5x86 never missed a beat

It's just overclocked 486DX4 with power saving features.

Wouldn't that be the fastest possible card for this motherboard?

Quadro4 100 NVS PCI aka GeForce 4 MX440 should work too.

I wouldn't call a 5x86 from AMD overclocked, just an appropriately clocked 486 with an actual 4x multiplier and write-back cache. In the same way a DX4 is not an overclocked DX/DX2. Although I'm sure that's what you meant.

How are nVidia cards with respect to old DOS game compatibility, VESA modes, smooth scrolling and analog output quality?

DOS game compatibility is excellent, and VESA support is more or less perfect up to at least the GF FX family. Analog quality is usually excellent out of the box too, a GF4 family card should be fine. If not, it's probably just a question of badly designed/cheaply built signal filters, modding those is quite simple if you got some SM soldering experience.

Personally I think scrolling is perfectly smooth, but that's quite subjective. Some ppl are just more sensitive than others to that kind of stuff.

All in all, my personal opinion is that a GF4 MX440 would be an excellent choice for this purpose.

Is there much value in using the GF4 MX440? I noted the following during my tests:

NVIDIA GeForce4 MX440 with AGP 8X 64 MB
Win95c display driver version 40.x works, however D3D and OGL games do not.

Regardless, if you do use it, you'd probably be the only one doing so, so that makes it kinda cool.

Guys this post is fantastic!

Allow me to get you all kickstarted (again) and inspired...

What about the fastest "natural" 486 possible, meeting the following "moral" conditions:
• No 5s in the name (5x86 and similar), just a pure 486
• No overclocks
• No weird adapters/Evergreen overdrives, etc., just the plain 486 CPU (but it is allowed to move between brands, Intel, AMD, Cyrix, IBM, etc.)
• Pure MS-DOS based (meaning, 6.22 at the latest), which means it has to work with apps, games, drivers, etc. So, forget very late SCSI320 and SCSI640, forget very late video cards...

Fastest pure natural real authentic 486 possible on the planet... go ahead! (then of course I'll post my proposed theoretical configuration...)

aries-mu wrote:

Guys this post is fantastic! […]
Show full quote

Guys this post is fantastic!

Allow me to get you all kickstarted (again) and inspired...

What about the fastest "natural" 486 possible, meeting the following "moral" conditions:
• No 5s in the name (5x86 and similar), just a pure 486
• No overclocks
• No weird adapters/Evergreen overdrives, etc., just the plain 486 CPU (but it is allowed to move between brands, Intel, AMD, Cyrix, IBM, etc.)
• Pure MS-DOS based (meaning, 6.22 at the latest), which means it has to work with apps, games, drivers, etc. So, forget very late SCSI320 and SCSI640, forget very late video cards...

Fastest pure natural real authentic 486 possible on the planet... go ahead! (then of course I'll post my proposed theoretical configuration...)

For the CPU:
Intel 486DX4 100 WB would be the fastest 486 CPU without a 5x86 moniker.
That said, an AMD 5x86 is actually a 486 except that it has a 4x multiplier and Write-Back cache.
So, an AMD 5x86 is, in every sense of the word, a natural 486.

tpowell.ca wrote:

For the CPU: Intel 486DX4 100 WB would be the fastest 486 CPU without a 5x86 moniker. That said, an AMD 5x86 is actually a 486 […]
Show full quote

For the CPU:
Intel 486DX4 100 WB would be the fastest 486 CPU without a 5x86 moniker.
That said, an AMD 5x86 is actually a 486 except that it has a 4x multiplier and Write-Back cache.
So, an AMD 5x86 is, in every sense of the word, a natural 486.

Thanks bro.
Yes but.... as a "purist", I don't like that number 5 on the chip and in its name 🤣

About the DX4, what about AMD Enhanced 486 DX4-120 WB with bus at 40 MHz (and of course PCI slots to avoid problems on the VLB at this frequency)?

aries-mu wrote:

Thanks bro. Yes but.... as a "purist", I don't like that number 5 on the chip and in its name lol […]
Show full quote

tpowell.ca wrote:

For the CPU: Intel 486DX4 100 WB would be the fastest 486 CPU without a 5x86 moniker. That said, an AMD 5x86 is actually a 486 […]
Show full quote

For the CPU:
Intel 486DX4 100 WB would be the fastest 486 CPU without a 5x86 moniker.
That said, an AMD 5x86 is actually a 486 except that it has a 4x multiplier and Write-Back cache.
So, an AMD 5x86 is, in every sense of the word, a natural 486.

Thanks bro.
Yes but.... as a "purist", I don't like that number 5 on the chip and in its name 🤣

About the DX4, what about AMD Enhanced 486 DX4-120 WB with bus at 40 MHz (and of course PCI slots to avoid problems on the VLB at this frequency)?

Wow, never heard of that one, but yes. That would beat the intel chip.

tpowell.ca wrote:

Wow, never heard of that one, but yes. That would beat the intel chip.

Yeah, that must have been a very nice creature!
I totally loved it, as I loved the AMD 486 DX2 80 back at pre-DX4 times, when the DX2-66 was the most common top CPU, and as I loved the AMD 486 DX40 as cheap alternative better than the DX33...

See, we're already starting to delineate the specs of the most powerful "natural" 486 computer on the planet....

Just a recap for new-visitors:
• No 5s in the name (5x86 and similar), just a pure 486 (aesthetically too!)
• No overclocks
• No weird adapters/Evergreen overdrives, etc., just the plain 486 CPU (but it is allowed to move between brands, Intel, AMD, Cyrix, IBM, etc.)
• Pure MS-DOS based (meaning, 6.22 at the latest), which means it has to work with apps, games, drivers, etc. So, forget very late SCSI320 and SCSI640, forget very late video cards...
Fastest pure natural real authentic 486 possible on the planet... go ahead! (then of course I'll post my proposed theoretical configuration...)

SUPPOSEDLY, according to a quick Google search, AMD actually did label the first few 5x86-133 CPUs as "Am486DX4-133". However, I cannot find any photos or hard evidence to confirm the existence of such a part. Labeling aside though, it's supposedly functionally-identical to a 5x86-133, so if such a part DOES exist, it might be fudging your "no 5x86" rule on those grounds despite the fact it's not labeled as such.

Ignoring the supposed "Am486DX4-133" due to the Bigfoot-esque nature of its existence, the Am486DX4-120 is the absolute fastest "pure 486" that I know of without violating any of the rules you imposed. Anything faster requires either overclocking, a 5x86, or a 486-based processor intended for use with embedded systems that couldn't fit in a standard motherboard anyway.

torindkflt wrote:

SUPPOSEDLY, according to a quick Google search, AMD actually did label the first few 5x86-133 CPUs as "Am486DX4-133". However, I cannot find any photos or hard evidence to confirm the existence of such a part. Labeling aside though, it's supposedly functionally-identical to a 5x86-133, so if such a part DOES exist, it might be fudging your "no 5x86" rule on those grounds despite the fact it's not labeled as such.

Ignoring the supposed "Am486DX4-133" due to the Bigfoot-esque nature of its existence...

🤣

Quick question: in your opinion, would the additional 13 MHz of the 5x86-133 CPU be worth the 7-MHz lowered speed on everything else (BUS, PCI cards and subsequently video card, RAM, L2 cache, EIDE, etc.) and the greater speed gap/unbalance between CPU (133) and the rest of the system (33) if compared with a seemingly more balanced 120 (CPU) / 40 (system)?
Would any difference in performances (not just purely isolated CPU benchmarks) be detectable?
Because the purpose of my question is to identify the fastest 486 possible in overall performance, not only in isolated CPU speed.

torindkflt wrote:

the Am486DX4-120 is the absolute fastest "pure 486" that I know of without violating any of the rules you imposed. Anything faster requires either overclocking, a 5x86, or a 486-based processor intended for use with embedded systems that couldn't fit in a standard motherboard anyway.

Okay, so, I can safely conclude that, given the above rules (which I admit are arbitrary, but we gotta draw a line somewhere 🤣), we've identified the CPU for the fastest 486 on the planet ever: AMD Enhanced AM486 DX4-120 WB.

What about the rest of the components? (I'll come out with some unexpected icing.... 😉 )

aries-mu wrote:

tpowell.ca wrote:

For the CPU: Intel 486DX4 100 WB would be the fastest 486 CPU without a 5x86 moniker. That said, an AMD 5x86 is actually a 486 […]
Show full quote

For the CPU:
Intel 486DX4 100 WB would be the fastest 486 CPU without a 5x86 moniker.
That said, an AMD 5x86 is actually a 486 except that it has a 4x multiplier and Write-Back cache.
So, an AMD 5x86 is, in every sense of the word, a natural 486.

Thanks bro.
Yes but.... as a "purist", I don't like that number 5 on the chip and in its name 🤣

Are you aware that this CPU was also officially sold as Am486DX5-133? It was even written on some chips. 5x86 was just a marketing name.

derSammler wrote:

Are you aware that this CPU was also officially sold as Am486DX5-133? It was even written on some chips. 5x86 was just a marketing name.

Ok derSammler, due to the relatively large request to consider the 133, but considering also the "aesthetic" requirement mentioned above (gotta read 486 on the chip rather than 5x86), I'll put back the AM486DX5-133 in the list of possible candidates, which now are:

• AMD Enhanced AM486 DX4-120 WB
• AMD AM486 DX5-133**
**Only specimens with written 486 on the chip, and only if the L1 cache is Write-Back

Now, given this "new entry" in the context, my questions above become even more pressing, which I propose again:

In your opinion, would the additional 13 MHz of the 5x86-133 CPU be worth the 7-MHz lowered speed on everything else (BUS, PCI cards and subsequently video card, RAM, L2 cache, EIDE, etc.) and the greater speed gap/unbalance between CPU (133) and the rest of the system (33) if compared with a seemingly more balanced 120 (CPU) / 40 (system)?
Would any difference in performances (not just purely isolated CPU benchmarks) be detectable?
Because the purpose of my context is to identify the fastest 486 possible in overall performance, not only in isolated CPU speed.

Just a recap for new-visitors:
• No 5s in the name (5x86 and similar), just a pure 486 (aesthetically too!)
• No overclocks
• No weird adapters/Evergreen overdrives, etc., just the plain 486 CPU (but it is allowed to move between brands, Intel, AMD, Cyrix, IBM, etc.)
• Pure MS-DOS based (meaning, 6.22 at the latest), which means it has to work with apps, games, drivers, etc. So, forget very late SCSI320 and SCSI640, forget very late video cards...
Fastest pure natural real authentic 486 possible on the planet... go ahead! (then of course I'll post my proposed theoretical configuration...)

NOTE: In case of DX4-120, the motherboard would be Biostar MB-8433UUD, as it can certainly set the PCI bus @ 40 MHz

aries-mu wrote:

derSammler wrote:

In your opinion, would the additional 13 MHz of the 5x86-133 CPU be worth the 7-MHz lowered speed on everything else (BUS, PCI cards and subsequently video card, RAM, L2 cache, EIDE, etc.) and the greater speed gap/unbalance between CPU (133) and the rest of the system (33) if compared with a seemingly more balanced 120 (CPU) / 40 (system)?
Would any difference in performances (not just purely isolated CPU benchmarks) be detectable?
Because the purpose of my context is to identify the fastest 486 possible in overall performance, not only in isolated CPU speed.

You could run those 5x86@120Mhz using the 3x multiplier on motherboard, 133Mhz was obtained with 2x multiplier (if i recall correctly), AMD used it to drive the CPU at 4x.
So, you can choose to run it @120/133Mhz whatever gives you better performance.