VOGONS


Reply 20 of 27, by bloodem

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie
H3nrik V! wrote on 2022-05-06, 07:55:

There are even CPUID differences between different steppings of 1GHz P!!!s, might be pure luck that the slot1 part worked and the FCPGA didn't?

@OP: What was the sSpecs of the CPUs in question?

I've tested hundreds of these CPUs on more than a hundred motherboards... Never in my life have I seen a motherboard that supports lower tier Coppermine CPUs but does not support higher tier CPUs simply because of microcode differences. Worst case scenario, it shows a weird CPU speed during POST, but other than that the CPU works perfectly.

On the other hand, I have seen plenty of bad slotkets, though. Which is why I have a very specific collection of slotkets that I've thoroughly tested and I know for a fact they are good.
Not all cheap slotkets are bad, but a lot of them are.

2 x PGA132 / 5 x Socket 3 / 9 x Socket 7 / 12 x SS7 / 1 x Socket 8 / 14 x Slot 1 / 5 x Slot A
5 x Socket 370 / 8 x Socket A / 2 x Socket 478 / 2 x Socket 754 / 3 x Socket 939 / 7 x LGA775 / 1 x LGA1155
Current rig: Ryzen 5 3600X
Backup rig: Core i7 7700k

Reply 21 of 27, by teh_Foxx0rz

User metadata
Rank Newbie
Rank
Newbie
H3nrik V! wrote on 2022-05-06, 07:55:

@OP: What was the sSpecs of the CPUs in question?

The S370 1000EB is SL52R, and the Slot 1 1000EB is SL4BS.

bloodem wrote on 2022-05-06, 07:58:

I've tested hundreds of these CPUs on more than a hundred motherboards... Never in my life have I seen a motherboard that supports lower tier Coppermine CPUs but does not support higher tier CPUs simply because of microcode differences. Worst case scenario, it shows a weird CPU speed during POST, but other than that the CPU works perfectly.

On the other hand, I have seen plenty of bad slotkets, though. Which is why I have a very specific collection of slotkets that I've thoroughly tested and I know for a fact they are good.
Not all cheap slotkets are bad, but a lot of them are.

It POSTed and everything, it was just the registry-restoring loop issue. Not sure what could lead to that, but if I never tried to boot to Windows 98 I would have presumed it all worked.

Reply 22 of 27, by H3nrik V!

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie
teh_Foxx0rz wrote on 2022-05-06, 12:31:
H3nrik V! wrote on 2022-05-06, 07:55:

@OP: What was the sSpecs of the CPUs in question?

The S370 1000EB is SL52R, and the Slot 1 1000EB is SL4BS.

SL52R is stepping cD0, cpuid 0x068A, SL4BS OTOH is stepping cC0, cpuid 0x686 so I for one could suspect a BIOS issue with that ...

Please use the "quote" option if asking questions to what I write - it will really up the chances of me noticing 😀

Reply 23 of 27, by PC Hoarder Patrol

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie
teh_Foxx0rz wrote on 2022-05-05, 21:15:
Alright everyone - […]
Show full quote

Alright everyone -

Thank you for all your input. There's a lot interesting things to consider!

I found myself thinking about the mention that the BIOS would need to recognise the CPU ID. And since this is a Slot 1 board, I figured they might only consider Slot 1 CPUs. So, I decided I'd try the obvious, and fork out for an actual Slot 1 PIII 1GHz (which fortunately didn't break the bank even if it wasn't pennies heh, although I did have to replace a monstrously ugly Dell cooler on it!).

And, well...
That worked!! Thanks to those of you who mentioned about that!
So yeah, either it was the CPU ID not being recognised, or just simply a problem with the slotket adapter. And that problem is solved.
Thanks very much everyone!

But of course, there are still some other things to follow up on.

PC Hoarder Patrol wrote on 2022-05-02, 01:25:

What board revision do you have - the later BIOS versions (with the widest CPU support) seem to be for revisions 4.x and above?

It seems my revision is indeed 4.0! So it looks like I was lucky there!

On modded BIOSes - those would have been the next place I'd have looked if this didn't work. Might still be neat to look into though still, even if I don't use one now, heh!

And fortunately, now that it's working, it doesn't seem to be an issue with my hard drive. I didn't think it was anyway, since it distinctly worked at slower speeds even at 133MHz FSB (a 533MHz PIII), but it was always a potential thing still, yeah.

To those recommending Intel chipsets - I really wanted 133MHz FSB support and ISA slots! So a VIA chipset is really the only practical option. I might have picked an Apollo Pro 133A, and did have a board with that in this PC previously, but yeah, that was a socket 370 and I wanted the versatility of a Slot 1. And I didn't need AGP4x with a Voodoo 3. But it's working now, so that's all good heh.

Tetrium wrote on 2022-05-04, 12:13:

Would perhaps be nice if your 693A chipsetted board could be used stably with the Voodoo 1 since it does have some nice features, while your faster s370 system could field your Voodoo 3 3500, perhaps even at 1GHz (which imo is definitely more than enough for the V3).

My S370 systems are unfortunately not really options for my Voodoo 3, since one is actually a 1.4GHz Tualatin system I've put a Geforce FX 5700 in for (basic) DX9 support, and the other, the Micro-ATX system, has a case with absolutely inadequate ventilation for a Voodoo 3, haha. It has barely any ventilation and no place to mount case fans!

shamino wrote on 2022-05-04, 22:52:
Normally there's a jumper somewhere that controls the PCI/etc clock dividers, but often it's purpose isn't clearly marked, so th […]
Show full quote
teh_Foxx0rz wrote on 2022-04-30, 20:47:

Additionally (maybe relatedly?): This board's method of changing the FSB configuration is very different to the Socket 370 boards I have. The Socket 370 boards just need a jumper or DIP switch (or couple) switched, and it just simply runs the CPU slower accordingly. However, this board has the DIP switches, but also a jumper that needs to be on when it's 66 or 100, and needs to be off to make it anything above 124MHz, and this also doesn't simply run the CPU slower, it just simply doesn't boot if this doesn't match the CPU's listed spec.

Normally there's a jumper somewhere that controls the PCI/etc clock dividers, but often it's purpose isn't clearly marked, so that extra jumper could have something to do with that. That doesn't explain why it would be the same for both 66 and 100FSB though. Maybe it's half of a 2-bit setting and the other half is buried in the "FSB" dip switches.

Are you heavily loading the RAM, and if so have you tried cutting it back? I recall these chipsets were flaky at PC133 when loaded with "too many" modules.
I'm looking in old notes for an old motherboard I had of this generation and apparently changing the BIOS setting "Delay DRAM Read Latch" to "No Delay" could improve stability.

So, there are three jumper headers associated with RAM/PCI speed, which are the ones with the blue jumpers in this picture.
https://i.imgur.com/RdND3du.jpg

The two on the left; the top one (JP10) seems to be turbo, but I'm not sure what the bottom one (JP12) seems to be exactly, though I think it's PCI speed?
Then there's the blue jumper on the right, near the DIP switches (JP15) - this mentions PCI in its description, but it seems intrinsically linked with the DIP switch settings and FSB, to the extent where it's in the table to the lower left of the chipset heatsink; the first column of it, next to the numbers. And as you can see, it's the only thing which changes between 100MHz FSB and 133MHz FSB. Since 133Mhz is listed as officially supported and not listed as a risky FSB speed in the manual, I don't think it's anything to do with overclocking the PCI slots or such. Perhaps it does just set a multiplier. Though I'm not sure what any of the possibilities have to do with the description there of 33Mhz vs 44Mhz.

And yeah, just for the record, I'm only using two RAM modules of 256MB each, which is pretty standard and I wouldn't expect to cause any power problems.

In addition to being curious to know whatever's going on with this, I also wonder, is this kind of thing, and not being able to change the speed of the CPU just by changing the FSB configuration like you can with S370 boards I've used, normal for Slot 1 boards that support 133MHz FSB?
At least I can get around this very easily on a Slot 1 board just by buying a few more CPUs for the configurations I might want to switch them out easily, even if this isn't quite as economical and elegant as I was hoping!

Glad to hear you found a workable solution, even if it cost you a bit more in the end.

Out of interest I did dig thru my 20+ year old notes on Gigabyte Slot 1 boards, which reminded me of some (unofficial) feedback from their Tech Support on the subject (oddly thru their UK office) - namely what was likely supported by what and how fast. Basically their postion was -

- use the latest BIOS version available for the widest processor support
- at that time Gigabyte only officially supported Slot 1 processors (no slokets), but acknowledged these would also most likely work with FCPGA processors if either the sloket had its own VRM or if the board was a later revision with an uprated VRM
- in most cases one of the above should see support for at least 800/850MHz processors and in many cases up to 1GHz with the right hardware combo

In my case I was able to get my old revision BX-based board to work with an 800MHz FCPGA processor on an Abit SlotKET!!!, and from your pics I can see that your board does indeed have an uprated VRM - a Harris (Intersil) HIP6004BCB which is a popular choice for Coppermine supporting board revsions.

Enjoy your new upgrade 😀

Reply 24 of 27, by torindkflt

User metadata
Rank Member
Rank
Member

Something else to keep in mind, Win9x had a bug on "high speed" processors (approximately faster than about 700MHz IIRC) where the shutdown process would run so fast, it would actually power off the system before the hard drive can finish flushing its cache to disk. The most common symptom of this was Windows running Scandisk on reboot complaining that the system had not been shut down properly, even if it had been. It's possible that it complaining about registry corruption is another symptom. There is a patch to fix this that adds a few second delay during shutdown to give the hard drive time to flush its cache, I don't recall the exact KB number off the top of my head though.

Reply 25 of 27, by AlexZ

User metadata
Rank Member
Rank
Member

I never experienced that problem on my PIII 900. It probably requires faster CPU than 1Ghz.

Pentium III 900E, ECS P6BXT-A+, 384MB RAM, NVIDIA GeForce FX 5600 128MB, Voodoo 2 12MB, 80GB HDD, Yamaha SM718 ISA, 19" AOC 9GlrA
Athlon 64 3400+, MSI K8T Neo V, 1GB RAM, NVIDIA GeForce 7600GT 512MB, 250GB HDD, Sound Blaster Audigy 2 ZS

Reply 26 of 27, by Gmlb256

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie

Never had that problem either with my PIII-750 computer on Windows 98.

If updates are needed to address that "high speed" CPU bug, there is the official "Windows Security Update CD February 2004" that can be downloaded on VOGONS drivers: http://vogonsdrivers.com/getfile.php?fileid=873&menustate=

Reply 27 of 27, by Tetrium

User metadata
Rank l33t++
Rank
l33t++
torindkflt wrote on 2022-05-07, 18:54:

Something else to keep in mind, Win9x had a bug on "high speed" processors (approximately faster than about 700MHz IIRC) where the shutdown process would run so fast, it would actually power off the system before the hard drive can finish flushing its cache to disk. The most common symptom of this was Windows running Scandisk on reboot complaining that the system had not been shut down properly, even if it had been. It's possible that it complaining about registry corruption is another symptom. There is a patch to fix this that adds a few second delay during shutdown to give the hard drive time to flush its cache, I don't recall the exact KB number off the top of my head though.

I do actually remember having come across this early shutdown thingy at least once. I always thought it was kinda odd, but I thought nothing of it at the time.
I don't remember which rig this was, alas.

This fix may also be part of (some of) the unofficial service packs or tweaking tools.

Whats missing in your collections?
My retro rigs (old topic)
Interesting Vogons threads (links to Vogonswiki)
Report spammers here!