Chkcpu wrote on 2025-07-29, 19:35:

Hi Babasha, […]
Show full quote

Babasha wrote on 2025-07-28, 21:02:

Hi all!)) […]
Show full quote

Hi all!))

Currently i write a little arcticle about VIA VPX boards and Intel 430TX boards comparision.
On my way i patch BIOS for my PCPartner VIB804DS (35-8804) with BIOS patcher in two ways:

1) first version - apply all patches and get nice results with AMD K6-2/500 CPU (good speed, no IDE limits, correct CPU and its speed in MHz POST), but this version is not best with AMD K6-2/450 (here i lost percentage in speed)

2) second version - apply all patches except "New koeffs support" and it gives me best speed result on AMD K6-2/500 and AMD K6-2/450, no IDE limits BUT CPU SPEED DURING POST ALWAYS SHOWED AS 400MHZ(((

Can someone look inside patched version and answer me is it possible to show correct CPU speed during post WITHOUT speed lost?

Thnx!

Hi Babasha,

Strange that “New koeffs support” in the BIOS Patcher tool doesn’t work well when patching the VIB804DS “BIOS-L (80619)” version. I don’t know why that is.

However, you are in luck because your VIB804DS board uses the LGS Super IO and there is a Release 4.2 eSupport upgrade BIOS for LGS IO available for your board on TRW.
https://theretroweb.com/motherboards/s/pcpart … ds-35-8804#bios

This Rel. 4.2 BIOS supports all Socket 7 CPUs ever made, and has all HDD size limits and UDMA bugs fixed. So you don’t have to use a patched BIOS.

Please let us know if this eSupport BIOS works better on your board.
Cheers, Jan

Hi!
I already try all BIOS'es for my mobo inc. eSupport 2004 version.
Its sad eSupport 2004 is rich-function one while been one of the slowest in DOS and W98 too with AMD K6-2/450 and AMD K6-2/500. I Try to repatch it too but its gain intermediate performane boost compared to "my" patched version.

Babasha wrote on 2025-07-30, 06:13:

Hi! I already try all BIOS'es for my mobo inc. eSupport 2004 version. Its sad eSupport 2004 is rich-function one while been one […]
Show full quote

Chkcpu wrote on 2025-07-29, 19:35:

Hi Babasha, […]
Show full quote

Babasha wrote on 2025-07-28, 21:02:

Hi all!)) […]
Show full quote

Hi all!))

Currently i write a little arcticle about VIA VPX boards and Intel 430TX boards comparision.
On my way i patch BIOS for my PCPartner VIB804DS (35-8804) with BIOS patcher in two ways:

1) first version - apply all patches and get nice results with AMD K6-2/500 CPU (good speed, no IDE limits, correct CPU and its speed in MHz POST), but this version is not best with AMD K6-2/450 (here i lost percentage in speed)

2) second version - apply all patches except "New koeffs support" and it gives me best speed result on AMD K6-2/500 and AMD K6-2/450, no IDE limits BUT CPU SPEED DURING POST ALWAYS SHOWED AS 400MHZ(((

Can someone look inside patched version and answer me is it possible to show correct CPU speed during post WITHOUT speed lost?

Thnx!

Hi Babasha,

Strange that “New koeffs support” in the BIOS Patcher tool doesn’t work well when patching the VIB804DS “BIOS-L (80619)” version. I don’t know why that is.

However, you are in luck because your VIB804DS board uses the LGS Super IO and there is a Release 4.2 eSupport upgrade BIOS for LGS IO available for your board on TRW.
https://theretroweb.com/motherboards/s/pcpart … ds-35-8804#bios

This Rel. 4.2 BIOS supports all Socket 7 CPUs ever made, and has all HDD size limits and UDMA bugs fixed. So you don’t have to use a patched BIOS.

Please let us know if this eSupport BIOS works better on your board.
Cheers, Jan

Hi!
I already try all BIOS'es for my mobo inc. eSupport 2004 version.
Its sad eSupport 2004 is rich-function one while been one of the slowest in DOS and W98 too with AMD K6-2/450 and AMD K6-2/500. I Try to repatch it too but its gain intermediate performane boost compared to "my" patched version.

Hi Babasha,

Weird, the 2004 eSupport BIOS is the most advanced and should give you the best performance, not the lowest.

I got curious to where these performance differences come from, so in the 86Box emulator I experimented a bit with the original 0619 BIOS and the BIOS Patcher versions, both with and without the New Koeffs support patch.
However, I didn’t find any difference in chipset programming that could explain a difference in timing settings for L2 cache or RAM.

Can you explain how you measured these performance differences?
I’m also curious about the board setup:
- Did you use the Setup defauts in the BIOS, or Manually optimized settings?
- How much RAM was installed?
- Which memory sticks were used; FPM, EDO, or SDRAM?
- What was the CPU setting? Was it 6x75 for the K6-2/450 and 6x83 for the K6-2/500?

Thanks in advance for answering these question.

Regards, Jan

Chkcpu wrote on Yesterday, 10:02:

Hi Babasha, […]
Show full quote

Babasha wrote on 2025-07-30, 06:13:

Hi! I already try all BIOS'es for my mobo inc. eSupport 2004 version. Its sad eSupport 2004 is rich-function one while been one […]
Show full quote

Chkcpu wrote on 2025-07-29, 19:35:

Hi Babasha, […]
Show full quote

Hi Babasha,

Strange that “New koeffs support” in the BIOS Patcher tool doesn’t work well when patching the VIB804DS “BIOS-L (80619)” version. I don’t know why that is.

However, you are in luck because your VIB804DS board uses the LGS Super IO and there is a Release 4.2 eSupport upgrade BIOS for LGS IO available for your board on TRW.
https://theretroweb.com/motherboards/s/pcpart … ds-35-8804#bios

This Rel. 4.2 BIOS supports all Socket 7 CPUs ever made, and has all HDD size limits and UDMA bugs fixed. So you don’t have to use a patched BIOS.

Please let us know if this eSupport BIOS works better on your board.
Cheers, Jan

Hi!
I already try all BIOS'es for my mobo inc. eSupport 2004 version.
Its sad eSupport 2004 is rich-function one while been one of the slowest in DOS and W98 too with AMD K6-2/450 and AMD K6-2/500. I Try to repatch it too but its gain intermediate performane boost compared to "my" patched version.

Hi Babasha,

Weird, the 2004 eSupport BIOS is the most advanced and should give you the best performance, not the lowest.

I got curious to where these performance differences come from, so in the 86Box emulator I experimented a bit with the original 0619 BIOS and the BIOS Patcher versions, both with and without the New Koeffs support patch.
However, I didn’t find any difference in chipset programming that could explain a difference in timing settings for L2 cache or RAM.

Can you explain how you measured these performance differences?
I’m also curious about the board setup:
- Did you use the Setup defauts in the BIOS, or Manually optimized settings?
- How much RAM was installed?
- Which memory sticks were used; FPM, EDO, or SDRAM?
- What was the CPU setting? Was it 6x75 for the K6-2/450 and 6x83 for the K6-2/500?

Thanks in advance for answering these question.

Regards, Jan

Thnx or the info!

1) Next Monday i will prepare table with the benchmarks results for: BIOS-L (80619), eSupport 2004 and BIOS-L (80619) patched with BP 4.23 (with and without "New Koeffs support")
2) Will attach BIOS settings too
3) 128MB
4) SDRAM by Kingston KVR133X64C2/128 PC133 CL2 module
5) CPU settings for K6-2/450AFX - 6x75, for K6-2/450AFX - 6x83

I measure DOS performance by SPEEDSYS 4.78 and port of Quake2 for DOS, in W98 by Sisoft Sandra 2001 and Quake2 ver. 3.20

Here the sample of my measurements - https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1_T0_r … of=true&sd=true