Probably, yes. Seen quite a few similar cases where everything but the pinheader was there. Actually can't remember a single occasion where I had to do more than adding a pinheader.

The latest one was a Gigabyte GA-586HX board, where the USB header was unpopulated, and the Cyrix/Intel selection header was hard wired. Also, the board was missing pinheaders for FSB/multi selection, it used dipswitches instead. Soldered in pinheaders, set all the dipswitches to open, and wired the pinheader to switches on one of the 5.25" panels, to be able to change FSB/multi without opening the case. Made a post about it back then, if you're interested 😀

I'd definitely give it a shot if I were you. Quite certain it'll work.

Well, my experience is that most 440BX boards will work with Tualatins, if you do the pin mod somehow, and the VRM can supply the required voltage.

Okey doke that sounds promising. Since the diagram is there on the board I would assume you are right. It was a pre built Celeron system so hopefully just been fixed to 66mhz by removing the jumper. Never thought of using dip switches for it, wonder if I could do something with that...

Cheers for your reply again, you’ve been tons of help with all this! Hopefully the voltages on the MSI board I asked you about will be OK and I can use the Tualatin in that with the slocket, but at least I have this one on standby now if that doesn’t work out. The board is supposed to have full Coppermine support so touch wood it goes low enough for a Tualatin as well.

Next thing I need to decide is Celeron or PIII (or 100mhz FSB Coppermine) - I have a Geforce4 Ti 4200 on the way and it might be a gamble getting that to work on an 89mhz AGP bus? And I’m not sure the QDI board will do anything between 100 and 133

Yeah, that would be my guess too 😀

Well, the headers uses standard 0.1" hole pitch, there should be fitting dipswitches available.

Managed to run a GF4 card with the AGP bus clocked to 100 MHz for months without any problems whatsoever, set the AGP divider to 1/1 by mistake, and it took me a while to find out 😁 Technically I could have left it as it was, but I really didn't want to stress that old hardware more than necessary, so changed it back to 2/3.

Generally early GF cards seems to be very tolerant to AGP overclocking. A Ti4200 would be my gfx card of choice for a 440BX 133MHz FSB system.

kaputnik wrote:

Yeah, that would be my guess too :) […]
Show full quote

Yeah, that would be my guess too 😀

Well, the headers uses standard hole spacing, there should be fitting dipswitches available.

Managed to run a GF4 card with the AGP bus clocked to 100 MHz for months without any problems whatsoever, set the AGP divider to 1/1 by mistake, and it took me a while to find out 😁 Technically I could have left it as it was, but I really didn't want to stress that old hardware more than necessary.

Generally early GF cards seems to be very tolerant to AGP overclocking. A Ti4200 would be my gfx card of choice for a 440BX 133MHz FSB system.

I was looking at your build with the toggle switches on the front - maybe I didn’t mean dip switches, it’s a pretty cool idea. Otherwise it’ll be just as easy to fit headers/jumpers than a dip switch.

That sounds promising! I didn’t know if I’d be better sticking to a Tualatin Celeron with 100mhz FSB for these boards but it sounds like the card should hopefully handle it. Just the voltage issue to get round now and I won’t know any more about that until the slocket comes in...

Hopefully if I buy a Tualatin it will work in at least one of the boards (preferably the MSI)... IDK