~misfit~ wrote:

David Maynard wrote:
=20
~misfit~ wrote:


David Maynard wrote:

According to Gigabyte it's the 810E chipset.


Ok. Like I said, I know jack about Intel chipsets.

That was why I mentioned it; so if you decided to do some research
you'd be looking for the right one.
=20
=20
Cool. I just called it an 810 as that's what Aida32 calls it.
=20
=20
I was just basing that 20% figure on the fact that I had two
Coppermine Celeron 900s running a while ago, one in this board and
one in a BX board. Same FSB, same amount of RAM. Both running SETI.
The BX board was just over 20% faster per WU over a period of time.

How about the CAS times on the two sets of RAM? And what display
resolution/color depth.
=20
=20
2.5. 1024x768 16bit.
=20
=20
Sounds like I better put those little 'sinks on the other ones then.

Well, if they are the memory regulators then they aren't being worked
any harder than before.
=20
=20
Nah, it was the memory ones I put the other 'sinks on.

Why in the world would the memory FETs have been so hot?


I went ahead and fitted some little 'sinks to the CPU FETs, put the fan=
back
in place above them and the damn PC kept crashing. When it would get as=
far
as starting to get into Windows (98SE) it would tell me the registry wa=
s bad
and it would have to re-start and fix it. It did that three times, each=
time
saying it had repaired the registry. Nice little 'sinks I made too, fit=
ted
with a bare minimum of epoxy. Filed the saw-cuts, lapped the bottoms. W=
hat a
waste of time! I'm back to running a Coppermine 900 in it now. Works
perfectly.

Odd. The manual says it's an 810E but the symptom you give sounds just li=
ke=20
the 810 board I have when I tried to run a P-III on it. It even identifie=
d=20
it as a P-III, which surprised me, but was unstable. I keep thinking that=
,=20
one of these days, I'll swap the P-III for the trusty old 566 that's in m=
y=20
mom's BH6 now and put it in there OC'd to 100MHz FSB. Not great since=20
that's the one that'll do 1020@120 but it's better than the 466 I have in=
=20
it now.

Hmm. The 6wmmc7 manual does say there is a "-1" version but doesn't=20
differentiate in the specs what the heck that means. But now, after looki=
ng=20
again, I see that down in the jumper section there is "Note: "JP23 is onl=
y=20
available when the motherboard use 82810E chipset." And JP23 is needed to=
=20
set the 133MHz FSB over-ride.

I'll bet yours doesn't have JP23 and is an 810, not E, chipset after all.=


Damn misleading 'spec' if that's the case because here is what it says:

2. SPECIFICATION
2.1. HARDWARE
=95 CPU - Socket 370 processor.
- 66/100/133 MHz Socket 370 on board.
=95 PROTECTION - Speaker Alarm when detect "CPU FAN Failure" or
=93CPU Overheat=94.
- Automatically slow down CPU speed when "CPU
Overheat".
- H/W monitor power status (=B15V, =B112V, VGTL,5VSB,
CPU voltage & CMOS battery voltage).
=95 SPEED - 66/100/133 MHz system speed.
- 33 MHz PCI-Bus speed.

Ain't no delineation of 'this one or that one' and the 810 does NOT suppo=
rt=20
133MHz, which they clearly say, with no 'qualifier', IS supported.

So much for 'specifications'.

I thought perhaps the Vcore regulator on mine couldn't handle the P-III b=
ut=20
maybe it has to do with initializing the P-III with it's larger cache,=20
which could be a similar problem on your board with the tualatin and it's=
=20
cache.