PB 486 'cruising the net

Hi Ben!

"Ben Myers wrote in message
There is some possibility that the absence of cache memory on the 450
motherboard is the reason the POD with interposer would not work properly.
Stay
tuned, as I do an archaeological dig through my older parts and
attachments.
It's possible I will unearth one of the "short" tag SRAM chips needed for
a
fully functioning cache on this board... Ben Myers



That would be great. I haven't looked through my box yet. I probably don't
have the right one anyway.

Although I claim to be a very good computer tech, I don't claim to be
infallible. If you get time, take a look at the UK 450MB page again:

http://www.uktsupport.co.uk/pb/mb/450.htm

.... and confirm my interpretation of the jumper settings. From what *I* can
tell, the settings are identical for the factory 486DX-2/66, DX4-100, and
P24T 83MHz POD. If I'm wrong, let me know.

Please note: my motherboard does not have a jumper 29.

I have J28 set at 1-2, never changed it.

As a reminder, my machine will boot to the BIOS identifying the CPU as a
P24T 100MHz, then lock-up at that screen. Hard lock, turn off required.

Thanks Ben.

bob

On Sep 3, 6:20*pm, "Robert E. Watts" wrote:
Hi Ben!

"Ben Myers * wrote in message

There is some possibility that the absence of cache memory on the 450
motherboard is the reason the POD with interposer would not work properly.
Stay
tuned, as I do an archaeological dig through my older parts and
attachments.
It's possible I will unearth one of the "short" tag SRAM chips needed for
a
fully functioning cache on this board... Ben Myers

That would be great. I haven't looked through my box yet. I probably don't
have the right one anyway.

Although I claim to be a very good computer tech, I don't claim to be
infallible. If you get time, take a look at the UK 450MB page again:

http://www.uktsupport.co.uk/pb/mb/450.htm

... and confirm my interpretation of the jumper settings. From what *I* can
tell, the settings are identical for the factory 486DX-2/66, DX4-100, and
P24T 83MHz POD. If I'm wrong, let me know.

Please note: my motherboard does not have a jumper 29.

I have J28 set at 1-2, never changed it.

As a reminder, my machine will boot to the BIOS identifying the CPU as a
P24T 100MHz, then lock-up at that screen. Hard lock, turn off required.

Thanks Ben.

bob

Is he using an Intel ODP 63 or 83MHZ
They all say 100mhz on boot for the above
but that is just the bios .
Still works as as ODP in mine.
There was a floppy with my ODP for
checking

"metronid" wrote in message

Is he using an Intel ODP 63 or 83MHZ
They all say 100mhz on boot for the above
but that is just the bios .
Still works as as ODP in mine.
There was a floppy with my ODP for
checking


*****

I am using an 83MHz POD.

There is no difference between 63 and 83Mhz versions. The 63MHz POD is for
people who don't know how to switch their FSB from 25MHz to 33MHz. ( Or for
motherboards that don't have that option; for example boards with
oscillators, although those are changeable also. )

I have never seen a 63MHz version that would not run at 33 or even 40MHz FSB
( 100MHz ) I have done it lots of times.

I have the POD floppies also, that doesn't make the motherboard run one.

I'll do some more checking/testing soon.

bobwatts

On Sep 4, 8:23*pm, "Robert E. Watts" wrote:
"metronid" *wrote in message

Is he using an Intel ODP 63 or 83MHZ
They all say 100mhz on boot for the above
but that is just the bios .
Still works as as ODP in mine.
There was a floppy with my ODP for
checking

*****

I am using an 83MHz POD.

There is no difference between 63 and 83Mhz versions. The 63MHz POD is for
people who don't know how to switch their FSB from 25MHz to 33MHz. ( Or for
motherboards that don't have that option; for example boards with
oscillators, although those are changeable also. )

I have never seen a 63MHz version that would not run at 33 or even 40MHz FSB
( 100MHz ) I have done it lots of times.

I have the POD floppies also, that doesn't make the motherboard run one.

I'll do some more checking/testing soon.

bobwatts

I have been building amplifiers for years.
I do not run above the manufacturer ratings.
This often leads to failure of component.


The fact that a 63mhz will run at 83mhz (33mhz at 2.5 x)
only means the item is not locked.
Intel could possibly have sold the same processor with just markings
changed but
I go with their secs.
Overclocking can often lead to problems.



In any case
Using silly logic
The problem is either the processor the board or the installer.
Logically eliminate each factor.


Will the processor work in another board.
Will the 450 work with the original processor


Are the jumpers

Jumpers J25 J29 J31
CPU Speed Multiplier SX/DX
486SX25 1-2 1-2 5-6
486SX33 2-3 1-2 5-6
486SX/2-50 1-2 2-3 5-6
486DX-33 2-3 1-2 1-2 & 3-4
486DX/2-50
486-25
486DX/4-75
P24T-62MHz 1-2 2-3 1-2 & 3-4
486DX/2-66
ODP486-33
P24T-83MHz 2-3 2-3 1-2 & 3-4
486DX/4-100 2-3 none 1-2 & 3-4


Are you using version 1.1a bios

Hi!

PB 486 does not like the POD with or without an interposer.

I'm coming in late to the discussion (betcha you're surprised to see me
here--well, I do still have some PB stuff!) but I tend to think the problem
lies in either cache or BIOS revision. And I'm thinking it's a caching
problem.

Remember all the fun we've had to the Lacuna boards over in the PS/2 world?

Boots to BIOS screen, recognizes it as a P24T running at 100MHz
(?), and stops/locks up.

That much is quite possibly OK. I've got an HP Vectra XA 486 desktop that
got "PODified" some while back and it's always had the clock speed wrong in
the BIOS. It runs, and is stable with every program I've ever tried on it.
Other utilities for checking on the CPU speed show it to be running at the
correct 83 or so MHz. Not sure how system setup gets the "100MHz" figure.

Does not like a Kingston 133MHz Turbochip.
Does the same EXACT thing above.

On those it may be a CPUID issue. If a value is returned that the system
doesn't like it might just freeze.

I know you don't really want to flash the BIOS, but I'd check and recheck
the cache situation (it *should* run with nothing there--other systems do)
and then update the BIOS to the latest revision.

William

Hello William !!!!!!!!!!


"William R. Walsh" m
wrote in message news:br1zk.341627$yE1.278136@attbi_s21...
Hi!

PB 486 does not like the POD with or without an interposer.

I'm coming in late to the discussion (betcha you're surprised to see me
here--well, I do still have some PB stuff!)

Surprised ?? ¿¿¿ !!!

Well, in the words of the immortal Chevy Chase, " I couldn't be more
surprised if I woke up and my head was sewn to the carpet" !

Boy Howdy, the gang on the PB NG will be glad to "see" your participation!



but I tend to think the problem
lies in either cache or BIOS revision. And I'm thinking it's a caching
problem.



Agreed. But remember, this board is devoid of L2 cache.



Remember all the fun we've had to the Lacuna boards over in the PS/2
world?



Sure, remember very well. I'm one of the few who got the L2 module to run
most of the time with my '77i's and '76i's. Really ****ed Louis off most of
the time too. :-)




Boots to BIOS screen, recognizes it as a P24T running at 100MHz
(?), and stops/locks up.

That much is quite possibly OK. I've got an HP Vectra XA 486 desktop that
got "PODified" some while back and it's always had the clock speed wrong
in
the BIOS. It runs, and is stable with every program I've ever tried on it.
Other utilities for checking on the CPU speed show it to be running at the
correct 83 or so MHz. Not sure how system setup gets the "100MHz" figure.



Yeah, I remember this also with various clone boards in the past. Back
during the time of steam powered cars. :-)



Does not like a Kingston 133MHz Turbochip.
Does the same EXACT thing above.

On those it may be a CPUID issue. If a value is returned that the system
doesn't like it might just freeze.

I know you don't really want to flash the BIOS, but I'd check and recheck
the cache situation (it *should* run with nothing there--other systems do)
and then update the BIOS to the latest revision.



Well, therein lies the problem. The PB BIOS is goofy. I'm reluctant to mess
with it unless it's last resort. This is an exceedingly rare computer, and
works great in every way except for the POD. I also feel that a BIOS update
will correct the "problem", but I'll have to think about it before I do
anything.

I *think* I have BIOS version 1.17, and BIOS 1.1A ( or something) is the
latest. Can't remember exactly. Got it downloaded, just scairt to use it.

Until this computer came along, I was beginning to be convinced that the
P60/66MHz machine didn't exist in an "art deco" tower form. And it may not.
But the fact that a 486 desk top "art deco" case exists leads me to believe
that a P60 tower *should* exist. I have two P60 desktop cases like this,
and I really think I saw these new in stores in tower form. I want one. As
well as a 486 tower. I'm pretty sure they made 'em.

At this time I have "filed" the 486 PB, and probably won't get back to it
for some time. I have already completed a lot of "winter projects" 'cause it
was just too damn hot and humid to go outside lately. :-)
Getting pretty good at replacing caps and mosfet voltage regulators. I have
brought some rare boards back to life lately. Got a Matsonic MS6260S (
PcChips ) with 1M of L2 working again, and a K63-450 to play with for
example. You don't see many Socket 7 boards with 1M of L2. For that matter,
you don't see many PB's with ANY L2. Stupid.

PB collection is approaching 25. I know.......... therapy.

Good to see you here Bill! Your contribution will be really appreciated !

bobwatts


--
boBWatts®©
EartH
Watts Carburetion Service
Whizzbang Computers
Official collector of: transfat asian plastic junk trinkets !

Incorrect reporting of clock speed was a major problem with almost any 486
motherboard BIOS, because the designers/programmers of the BIOSes back then
never ever anticpated the Pentium OverDrive and the 133MHz 486 workalikes.

The problem even occured on early Pentium systems when PowerLeap and others
introduced their various CPU upgrade kits.

This all takes me back a ways.

Still looking for the "short" 18-pin cache chip needed for a complete PB 450
external cache. I think that would fix the POD problem... Ben Myers

On Sun, 14 Sep 2008 05:38:15 GMT, "William R. Walsh"
m wrote:

Hi!

PB 486 does not like the POD with or without an interposer.

I'm coming in late to the discussion (betcha you're surprised to see me
here--well, I do still have some PB stuff!) but I tend to think the problem
lies in either cache or BIOS revision. And I'm thinking it's a caching
problem.

Remember all the fun we've had to the Lacuna boards over in the PS/2 world?

Boots to BIOS screen, recognizes it as a P24T running at 100MHz
(?), and stops/locks up.

That much is quite possibly OK. I've got an HP Vectra XA 486 desktop that
got "PODified" some while back and it's always had the clock speed wrong in
the BIOS. It runs, and is stable with every program I've ever tried on it.
Other utilities for checking on the CPU speed show it to be running at the
correct 83 or so MHz. Not sure how system setup gets the "100MHz" figure.

Does not like a Kingston 133MHz Turbochip.
Does the same EXACT thing above.

On those it may be a CPUID issue. If a value is returned that the system
doesn't like it might just freeze.

I know you don't really want to flash the BIOS, but I'd check and recheck
the cache situation (it *should* run with nothing there--other systems do)
and then update the BIOS to the latest revision.

William