VOGONS


best atx 430hx board?

Topic actions

First post, by noshutdown

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie

for socket7 board with best performance, i would go for mvp3 with 2mb cache. but for "classical" socket7 boards without agp, the 430hx is a cult chipset to me.
to pick a favorite 430hx board, i would like it to meet following requests:

1. it shall be atx, so i can avoid fiddling with at psu, power switch, serial mouse, and so on.
2. supports 11bit tag so i can cache more than 64mb ram.
3. uses coin cell, without troublesome rtc component.
4. vcc can go down to 2.0v so i can use k6-2+, or 2.2v for k6-3 at least.
5. overclocking above 66fsb is not requested, going down to 40fsb is optional.

are there any boards that meet such conditions?
there is one more problem: since intel uses only 2 pins for socket7 multiplier, does that mean all hx boards would only support up to 3.5x(excluding k6-2's 2x to 6x mapping) without modding the socket? are there any hx boards designed with amd's third multiplier pin in mind?

Reply 2 of 26, by gdjacobs

User metadata
Rank l33t++
Rank
l33t++

Ah, the legendary T2P4. Perhaps the best Socket 7 motherboard ever.

She's famous for doing 83mhz FSB, stable, if the PCI cards are up to the task.

All hail the Great Capacitor Brand Finder

Reply 3 of 26, by shamino

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie

I noticed there's a later revision 3.00 board with the same name but a very different layout.

pi-xp55t2p4-rev3.00.jpg
Filename
pi-xp55t2p4-rev3.00.jpg
File size
316.96 KiB
Views
1546 views
File comment
picture from eBay
File license
Fair use/fair dealing exception

The rev3.00 manual says it supports split voltages but only down to 2.5v. I don't know if that manual was meant to apply to the rev1.4 board.

The older version (I think it says 1.4?) appears to have a linear regulator for the CPU, while the rev3.00 is a switching type.

From appearance I'm not sure the rev1.4 board would support split voltages. It's picture shows a missing 2nd regulator that it would probably need for that. I think the regulator with the large heatsink would be the 3.3v supply. I'm just speculating from the appearance though.

Reply 4 of 26, by vetz

User metadata
Rank Hardware Mod
Rank
Hardware Mod

I have both revisions. Rev 3.0 is the one you want. Shamino is correct in his post.

Rev 3.0 has:
- coin battery
- better CPU support
- more voltage options
- 512kb cache built in
- ATX connector (rev 1.4 sometimes comes with only AT connector)

The ATX version of XP55T2P4 does not have 83mhz FSB option which the AT version of the board does have. Other than that it is a kick ass board with great performance and compatibility. They are very stable and troublefree. There should be AMD K6-III+ support and BIOS hack for 128GB harddrives on the IDE if you go here and download: http://web.inter.nl.net/hcc/J.Steunebrink/k6plus.htm. You can set the multiplier to 2x on the K6's which translate to 6x = 400mhz.

3D Accelerated Games List (Proprietary APIs - No 3DFX/Direct3D)
3D Acceleration Comparison Episodes

Reply 5 of 26, by noshutdown

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie

about the voltage thing which i am concerned about:
both t2p4 and xp55t2p4's manual only documented following options:
single voltage (3.3 and 3.5)
3.2
2.9
2.8
2.7
2.5
but then its known that t2p4 has undocumented jumper combinations which provides vcc all the way down to 2.0, allowing it to run k6-2 without anyout trouble. i am not sure if the xp55t2p4's voltage regulator design is the same as t2p4 and so the jumpers would work the same way?

btw: do gigabyte, abit, msi, dfi, iwill and others have atx 430hx boards? i think aopen has one named ax53, but havn't looked into the manual yet.
then again, all of them seems pretty rare, compared to t2p4 and other at 430hx boards still seems plentiful.

Reply 6 of 26, by vetz

User metadata
Rank Hardware Mod
Rank
Hardware Mod
noshutdown wrote:

i am not sure if the xp55t2p4's voltage regulator design is the same as t2p4 and so the jumpers would work the same way?

for 2.0V you had to set jumpers 2.5 & 2.7 & 2.8 & 2.9
for 2.1V you had to set jumpers 2.5 & 2.7 & 2.8
for 2.2V you had to set jumpers 2.5 & 2.7
for 2.3V you had to set jumpers 2.5 & 2.8
for 2.4V you had to set jumpers 2.7 & 2.8
for 2.5V you had to set jumpers 2.5
I can't find any mention that it won't be the same across both boards, and from what I remember the jumper config is the same on my AT and ATX versions of the board (yes I have the AT as well as both ATX rev's)
https://web.archive.org/web/20070210052552/ht … oup/P55T2P4.htm

noshutdown wrote:

btw: do gigabyte, abit, msi, dfi, iwill and others have atx 430hx boards? i think aopen has one named ax53, but havn't looked into the manual yet.
then again, all of them seems pretty rare, compared to t2p4 and other at 430hx boards still seems plentiful.

I can't think of any other 430HX ATX board at the top of my mind, only AT boards.

3D Accelerated Games List (Proprietary APIs - No 3DFX/Direct3D)
3D Acceleration Comparison Episodes

Reply 7 of 26, by elianda

User metadata
Rank l33t
Rank
l33t

Well, there is the Gigabyte GA-586UX and Gigabyte GA-586DX. But you have to keep in mind that using ATX was still very uncommon at this time.

Retronn.de - Vintage Hardware Gallery, Drivers, Guides, Videos. Now with file search
Youtube Channel
FTP Server - Driver Archive and more
DVI2PCIe alignment and 2D image quality measurement tool

Reply 9 of 26, by ODwilly

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie

If you do not mind being limited to Intel cpu's you can usually find some nice Intel HX motherboards from OEM machines.

Main pc: Asus Rampage Gene ii, X5650, 250gb Samsung Evo, RX480, 12gb Crucial DDR3 1600.

Reply 10 of 26, by vetz

User metadata
Rank Hardware Mod
Rank
Hardware Mod
RacoonRider wrote:

Yes, HX is a little too old for ATX. There are plenty of ATX TX boards though.

TX has the 64mb cache limit, but the boards normally feature UDMA support as well as SDRAM.

3D Accelerated Games List (Proprietary APIs - No 3DFX/Direct3D)
3D Acceleration Comparison Episodes

Reply 13 of 26, by Skyscraper

User metadata
Rank l33t
Rank
l33t
havli wrote:

Does the 64MB cacheable limit also affect K6-III(+) and K6-2+?

Yes and No.

Yes for the 512KB motherboard cache, it wont cache more than 64MB regardless CPU. No for the CPUs own L2 cache, it can cache up to 4GB.

Last edited by Skyscraper on 2016-02-19, 16:22. Edited 1 time in total.

Main PC: Dual Xeon X5690@4.6ghz, Evga - SR-2, 48gb memory, Intel X25-M g2 SSD and a Nvidia GTX 980 ti.
Retro PC #3: K6-2 450@500mhz, PC-Chips m577, 256mb sdram, AWE64 and a Voodoo Banshee.

Reply 14 of 26, by nforce4max

User metadata
Rank l33t
Rank
l33t
havli wrote:

Does the 64MB cacheable limit also affect K6-III(+) and K6-2+?

Not at all, install as much ram as you want 😀

On a far away planet reading your posts in the year 10,191.

Reply 15 of 26, by RacoonRider

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie

I remember seeing somewhere a speedsys picture of K6-3+ where L3 (motherboard) cache worked actually slower than RAM 😁 Does too complicated caching scheme render the point of L3 obsolete?

Reply 16 of 26, by havli

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie

Thank you.
One of my S7 430TX boards seems to be perfect for K6-III... onboard cache is defective, so not very useful with anything else. 😀

HW museum.cz - my collection of PC hardware

Reply 17 of 26, by Skyscraper

User metadata
Rank l33t
Rank
l33t
RacoonRider wrote:

I remember seeing somewhere a speedsys picture of K6-3+ where L3 (motherboard) cache worked actually slower than RAM 😁 Does too complicated caching scheme render the point of L3 obsolete?

It depends on the chipset and probably alot of other factors. With VIA MVP3 you want to use the L3 cache and keep within its cacheable range (128MB with 512KB, 256MB with 1MB and 512MB with 2MB cache).

I posted this image in another thread to show the memory and cache performace of VIA MVP3 with a K6-3+, the motherboard is a PC Chips M577.

S600MVP3.jpg
Filename
S600MVP3.jpg
File size
264.34 KiB
Views
1334 views
File license
Fair use/fair dealing exception

Main PC: Dual Xeon X5690@4.6ghz, Evga - SR-2, 48gb memory, Intel X25-M g2 SSD and a Nvidia GTX 980 ti.
Retro PC #3: K6-2 450@500mhz, PC-Chips m577, 256mb sdram, AWE64 and a Voodoo Banshee.

Reply 18 of 26, by kanecvr

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie
havli wrote:

Does the 64MB cacheable limit also affect K6-III(+) and K6-2+?

Why would you use one of those with anything other then a super socket 7 motherboard? Even you your board's bios supports the K6-3, it will run like crap compared to how it would run on a MVP3 or ALi Aladdin V. You're also limited to 83MHz (on a good day) x 3.5 on i430 chipsets (as far as I know).

I can understand building an i430 based machine for a Pentium or Cyrix CPU, but using a K6-2+ or K6-III si a waste in my point of view.

Reply 19 of 26, by gdjacobs

User metadata
Rank l33t++
Rank
l33t++

The mobile chips allow software dial-a-clock, so it's really the most flexible solution in terms of DOS and early Windows retro gaming. In a case like this, running 66 mhz fsb is advantageous as it allows the machine to reach a little deeper down into the 386 performance envelope. So, i430 based chipsets can work just fine, depending what you want to achieve.

All hail the Great Capacitor Brand Finder