At once!

CPU and L1 cache speed are OK
L2 cache and RAM speed are not so high but normal for SIS5511
Maybe fine-tuning of L2 and RAM parameters can give some boost but its IBM office motherboard and i dont think it give some possibility to fine-tune them.

What about swapping the motherboard?.

Señor Ventura wrote on 2025-12-23, 01:11:

What about swapping the motherboard?.

Nothing special)))
U need just to swap it to other LPX-motherboard... anr riser for it... maybe power source too. Sometimes it needs some mechanical modification of case)))

Anyway all LPX motherboards are office-specific and not so fast as "home" mobos. 😀

At the end it has to be the tesseo's syndrome.

-Swap my ibm G40 to G54.
-Swap motherboard sis chipset to intel one.
-Swap cpu, add svga...

Well, i don't know... this?:
https://ebay.us/m/p2P4tm

not this:
https://ebay.us/m/MYdFgY

Señor Ventura wrote on 2025-12-21, 03:48:

It has sense, cause it would be one of the very first revisions of the motherboards, and so, is one of the oldest standards for […]
Show full quote

bertrammatrix wrote on 2025-12-20, 17:47:

I didn't notice- wasn't visible in photos - the cache on that board is a separate stick behind the cpu - is it asynchronous, or pipeline burst? While most Pentium boards came with PB some earlier ones also could just have asynchronous (you can usually tell just by looking) this could also be the reason for lower then average performance

It has sense, cause it would be one of the very first revisions of the motherboards, and so, is one of the oldest standards for memory and chipset.

The mistery could be solved with this (asynchronous cache, as you said). I will try with 15ns 512KB, maybe i would gain 3 or 4 extra fps.

bertrammatrix wrote on 2025-12-20, 18:18:

To be fair I think there was a speedsys shot though an updated one would be nice.

That's it, i posted some photos of speedsys and quake benchmark (not in this thread, but commented).

jtchip wrote on 2025-12-21, 01:58:

In any case, another Speedsys screenshot would help (it has a built-in screenshot function instead of taking a photo).

I took some photos just today, speedsys and chkcpu.

Whats wrong with your speedsys results? looks perfectly normal for me

theelf wrote on 2025-12-23, 12:58:

Señor Ventura wrote on 2025-12-21, 03:48:

It has sense, cause it would be one of the very first revisions of the motherboards, and so, is one of the oldest standards for […]
Show full quote

bertrammatrix wrote on 2025-12-20, 17:47:

I didn't notice- wasn't visible in photos - the cache on that board is a separate stick behind the cpu - is it asynchronous, or pipeline burst? While most Pentium boards came with PB some earlier ones also could just have asynchronous (you can usually tell just by looking) this could also be the reason for lower then average performance

It has sense, cause it would be one of the very first revisions of the motherboards, and so, is one of the oldest standards for memory and chipset.

The mistery could be solved with this (asynchronous cache, as you said). I will try with 15ns 512KB, maybe i would gain 3 or 4 extra fps.

bertrammatrix wrote on 2025-12-20, 18:18:

To be fair I think there was a speedsys shot though an updated one would be nice.

That's it, i posted some photos of speedsys and quake benchmark (not in this thread, but commented).

jtchip wrote on 2025-12-21, 01:58:

In any case, another Speedsys screenshot would help (it has a built-in screenshot function instead of taking a photo).

I took some photos just today, speedsys and chkcpu.

Whats wrong with your speedsys results? looks perfectly normal for me

The attachment IMG_20251223_135542_670.jpg is no longer available

Well, apparently it underperforms... everything points to the write through that the sis chipset applies to the ram/cache.

So curious how quake reach 34fps under windows, or under dos without sound, equally, but the point is that 34fps is a bit low for a p200.

So, now i have two options:
1) upgrade the bios hoping it allows now changing to write back instead write through (i will take a look later of how to do it).
2) swap the motherboard (later revisions of the aptiva 2144 includes intel chipset with improved memory management).

Seems pretty normal to me. Memory bandwidth might be a bit low, but that's the SiS chipset for you.
What are your goals with the system? It seems to be working fine as far as I can tell.

Jasin Natael wrote on 2025-12-23, 14:56:

Seems pretty normal to me. Memory bandwidth might be a bit low, but that's the SiS chipset for you.
What are your goals with the system? It seems to be working fine as far as I can tell.

Is not the bandwidth, but the way it uses the bandwidth. Write through results not so efficient than write back.

Quake should be giving around 40fps, not 34, and generally i'm noticing some performance lacks in another games that i don't remember running like this.

The last solution is upgrading the bios expecting some change allowing write back configuration, or swap the main board for another with a intel chipset, directly.

I woud like to comment the monitor, and a couple of speakers:
-My G40 has several signals of wear, so i bought a G54 (not received yet). I would have want a P50, but, Could someone with a G54 tell around here about the experience with it?.
-I'm thinking about a edifier m60, or mr3, What do you all uses?.

Señor Ventura wrote on 2025-12-23, 14:48:

Well, apparently it underperforms... everything points to the write through that the sis chipset applies to the ram/cache. […]
Show full quote

theelf wrote on 2025-12-23, 12:58:

Señor Ventura wrote on 2025-12-21, 03:48:

It has sense, cause it would be one of the very first revisions of the motherboards, and so, is one of the oldest standards for […]
Show full quote

It has sense, cause it would be one of the very first revisions of the motherboards, and so, is one of the oldest standards for memory and chipset.

The mistery could be solved with this (asynchronous cache, as you said). I will try with 15ns 512KB, maybe i would gain 3 or 4 extra fps.

That's it, i posted some photos of speedsys and quake benchmark (not in this thread, but commented).

I took some photos just today, speedsys and chkcpu.

Whats wrong with your speedsys results? looks perfectly normal for me

The attachment IMG_20251223_135542_670.jpg is no longer available

Well, apparently it underperforms... everything points to the write through that the sis chipset applies to the ram/cache.

So curious how quake reach 34fps under windows, or under dos without sound, equally, but the point is that 34fps is a bit low for a p200.

So, now i have two options:
1) upgrade the bios hoping it allows now changing to write back instead write through (i will take a look later of how to do it).
2) swap the motherboard (later revisions of the aptiva 2144 includes intel chipset with improved memory management).

34fps what resolution? fullscreen?

Like i said in a post earlier Pentium 200 (no mmx), Full Yes INTEL 82430FX board, S3 Trio 64V2, Quake timedemo demo 1, 32.6fps on 320x240,13.8fps at 360x480 , totally fullscreen (no life bar)

Jasin Natael wrote on 2025-12-23, 14:56:

Seems pretty normal to me. Memory bandwidth might be a bit low, but that's the SiS chipset for you.
What are your goals with the system? It seems to be working fine as far as I can tell.

Exactly. Sis chipsets of that era were almost always slower than intel counterparts, I would expect nothing different. I remember as a kid we'd often benchmark our junk and be like "woo, at 83mhz fsb I ALMOST have the same memory performance as an intel at 66 🤣".

Indeed the step between main memory and cache speed is very small which isn't helpful. However I'm also not sure that upgrading to another similar motherboard that would fit the system will bring you the night and day difference you are hoping for (unless it supports ppb L2, mmx/k6-2 etc), but if you reeeealy like the case and just have to stick with it for nostalgic reasons sure go for it.

Before I went out and spent money on another socket 7 board, which isn't cheap I would evaluate what games you wish to play on this system.
Maybe a cheap K6-2 CPU would be the most meaningful upgrade you could make.

If you are targeting late 90s games then honestly, a slot 1/socket 370 something machine would make more sense.
But in that event other components are going to have to be along for the ride.

theelf wrote on 2025-12-23, 17:30:

Señor Ventura wrote on 2025-12-23, 14:48:

Well, apparently it underperforms... everything points to the write through that the sis chipset applies to the ram/cache. […]
Show full quote

theelf wrote on 2025-12-23, 12:58:

Whats wrong with your speedsys results? looks perfectly normal for me

The attachment IMG_20251223_135542_670.jpg is no longer available

Well, apparently it underperforms... everything points to the write through that the sis chipset applies to the ram/cache.

So curious how quake reach 34fps under windows, or under dos without sound, equally, but the point is that 34fps is a bit low for a p200.

So, now i have two options:
1) upgrade the bios hoping it allows now changing to write back instead write through (i will take a look later of how to do it).
2) swap the motherboard (later revisions of the aptiva 2144 includes intel chipset with improved memory management).

34fps what resolution? fullscreen?

Like i said in a post earlier Pentium 200 (no mmx), Full Yes INTEL 82430FX board, S3 Trio 64V2, Quake timedemo demo 1, 32.6fps on 320x240,13.8fps at 360x480 , totally fullscreen (no life bar)

Yesss, sorry. 320x200, full screen, same fps under windows and dos, even without sound card. 34fps.

The thing is, write throug lacks performing, right?.

bertrammatrix wrote on 2025-12-23, 17:51:

Exactly. Sis chipsets of that era were almost always slower than intel counterparts, I would expect nothing different. I remember as a kid we'd often benchmark our junk and be like "woo, at 83mhz fsb I ALMOST have the same memory performance as an intel at 66 🤣".

Indeed the step between main memory and cache speed is very small which isn't helpful. However I'm also not sure that upgrading to another similar motherboard that would fit the system will bring you the night and day difference you are hoping for (unless it supports ppb L2, mmx/k6-2 etc), but if you reeeealy like the case and just have to stick with it for nostalgic reasons sure go for it.

I posted two links, but i think that motherboards aren't valid. What do you think about it?.

Theoretically, an 2144 m-50, m-51, or m-71, should fit in my aptiva's box, and has that write back in the chipset.

Jasin Natael wrote on 2025-12-23, 20:04:

Before I went out and spent money on another socket 7 board, which isn't cheap I would evaluate what games you wish to play on t […]
Show full quote

Before I went out and spent money on another socket 7 board, which isn't cheap I would evaluate what games you wish to play on this system.
Maybe a cheap K6-2 CPU would be the most meaningful upgrade you could make.

If you are targeting late 90s games then honestly, a slot 1/socket 370 something machine would make more sense.
But in that event other components are going to have to be along for the ride.

The sweet spot is 1997, and some of 1998, but things like grand prix 2 needs the best hardware possible.

Isn't bad to upgrade to the max (because yes), but some software benefits too.

Señor Ventura wrote on 2025-12-23, 23:43:

theelf wrote on 2025-12-23, 17:30:

Señor Ventura wrote on 2025-12-23, 14:48:

Well, apparently it underperforms... everything points to the write through that the sis chipset applies to the ram/cache. […]
Show full quote

Well, apparently it underperforms... everything points to the write through that the sis chipset applies to the ram/cache.

So curious how quake reach 34fps under windows, or under dos without sound, equally, but the point is that 34fps is a bit low for a p200.

So, now i have two options:
1) upgrade the bios hoping it allows now changing to write back instead write through (i will take a look later of how to do it).
2) swap the motherboard (later revisions of the aptiva 2144 includes intel chipset with improved memory management).

34fps what resolution? fullscreen?

Like i said in a post earlier Pentium 200 (no mmx), Full Yes INTEL 82430FX board, S3 Trio 64V2, Quake timedemo demo 1, 32.6fps on 320x240,13.8fps at 360x480 , totally fullscreen (no life bar)

Yesss, sorry. 320x200, full screen, same fps under windows and dos, even without sound card. 34fps.

The thing is, write throug lacks performing, right?.

34fps at 320x200 fullscreen in a P1 200 is perfectly normal, my board like a say is a nice Triton 1, 256k cache L2, and i get 33.1fps at 320x200 in same P1 200 non mmx

You have a perfect working pentium

theelf wrote on 2025-12-24, 00:23:

34fps at 320x200 fullscreen in a P1 200 is perfectly normal, my board like a say is a nice Triton 1, 256k cache L2, and i get 33.1fps at 320x200 in same P1 200 non mmx

You have a perfect working pentium

So, with a better chipset, could be expected a better performance?.

Señor Ventura wrote on 2025-12-24, 05:12:

theelf wrote on 2025-12-24, 00:23:

34fps at 320x200 fullscreen in a P1 200 is perfectly normal, my board like a say is a nice Triton 1, 256k cache L2, and i get 33.1fps at 320x200 in same P1 200 non mmx

You have a perfect working pentium

So, with a better chipset, could be expected a better performance?.

? there is nothing better than a Triton for classic pentium, and you have same performance already

Forget, you will never get more performance, because there is no more

If you want more performance use different CPU

theelf wrote on 2025-12-24, 08:30:

? there is nothing better than a Triton for classic pentium, and you have same performance already […]
Show full quote

Señor Ventura wrote on 2025-12-24, 05:12:

theelf wrote on 2025-12-24, 00:23:

34fps at 320x200 fullscreen in a P1 200 is perfectly normal, my board like a say is a nice Triton 1, 256k cache L2, and i get 33.1fps at 320x200 in same P1 200 non mmx

You have a perfect working pentium

So, with a better chipset, could be expected a better performance?.

? there is nothing better than a Triton for classic pentium, and you have same performance already

Forget, you will never get more performance, because there is no more

If you want more performance use different CPU

With this box, my options are limited. Some later revisions of the aptiva 2144 has better mainboards, so i ask for them... apparently it gets better performance with write back instead write through, What mainboards were those?.

IBM Aptiva 2144-M51, M63, or M71, with 633577 motherboard and chipset intel 430FX (Triton I), is the only information i have...

And i would like to ask for flashing my bios before thinking of that, Where would i get the flash aplication?.

Sorry if i ask too much! ^^u

bertrammatrix wrote on 2025-12-07, 00:59:

I wouldn't expect that to be very playable nor perform much better then a slideshow. I am playing Half Life rn on a 233mmx overclocked to 290mhz (83mhz fsb) with a 12mb voodoo2 and at 640x480 I'd call it just barely playable, even though the minimum requirements were probably around a p166.

We were less spoiled in those days - we knew minimum requirements really meant "good luck with these" and usually just put up with some abysmal resolution to have a chance at playing (and still got slideshows when more enemies showed up)

Back in the day I played HL on a P200mmx, 512kb L2, voodoo2 12mb and it was very playable at high resolution (800x600 I think, perhaps 1024). Not 60fps, but perhaps a solid 20-25? I finished the game in any case.

So either your idea of barely playable is very different, or there is a config issue

Nicolas 2000 wrote on 2025-12-25, 18:00:

bertrammatrix wrote on 2025-12-07, 00:59:

I wouldn't expect that to be very playable nor perform much better then a slideshow. I am playing Half Life rn on a 233mmx overclocked to 290mhz (83mhz fsb) with a 12mb voodoo2 and at 640x480 I'd call it just barely playable, even though the minimum requirements were probably around a p166.

We were less spoiled in those days - we knew minimum requirements really meant "good luck with these" and usually just put up with some abysmal resolution to have a chance at playing (and still got slideshows when more enemies showed up)

Back in the day I played HL on a P200mmx, 512kb L2, voodoo2 12mb and it was very playable at high resolution (800x600, perhaps 1024). Not 60fps, but perhaps a solid 20-25?

So either your idea of barely playable is very different, or there is a config issue

Yes, I think playability varies quite a bit from person to person. 20-25fps in a 3D accelerated game like that would have made me want to tear my eyeballs out back then and would still do so today. At 20fps there is a 50ms input delay just from displaying one frame to the next (not counting the rest of the system calculating input or game logic). That is like adding internet lag to your game inputs. For me, that would only be playable if the game was slow paced, did not require precise clicks\movement and I had no other choice (lowering settings, etc.).

Pretty sure I played Half-Life originally on a Voodoo 3 2000 PCI and an Athlon 750 (I was a bit late), and it was okay. Upgrading to a Geforce 2 GTS was light a night and day difference though, performance wise and was much welcome. Still, further upgrades later with 1.3-2Ghz Athlons and a Geforce4 Ti 4400 or Radeon 9600 Pro allowed me to run at higher resolutions while my monitor's refresh rate (always 85+) meant that I could still see and benefit from the higher frame rates in games\mods that ran on the Half Life engine.

Nicolas 2000 wrote on 2025-12-25, 18:00:

Back in the day I played HL on a P200mmx, 512kb L2, voodoo2 12mb and it was very playable at high resolution (800x600 I think, perhaps 1024). Not 60fps, but perhaps a solid 20-25? I finished the game in any case.

So either your idea of barely playable is very different, or there is a config issue

I am currently playing HL on my Pentium II 300Mhz with Voodoo 2 at 800x600. Occasional stutters, but it's very playable.

I previously tried it on my Pentium MMX 200Mhz with Voodoo 1. It worked, but was much less smooth.

Your system was somewhere between my two

-Half life is not bad with a pentium pro 200mhz and a voodoo 1:
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=bg5FXhty0u8

-Pentium mmx with voodoo 2 in pretty smooth at 800x600 as well:
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=-Puhajj28gs&pp= … gcJCR4Bo7VqN5tD

-Pentium 133, bad performing, but, ¿software?:
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=fisb1sr7_Rk