Talk:Socket 7 Builds - Revision history

RacoonRider at 14:18, 5 April 2013

2013-04-05T14:18:49Z

Enigma at 11:39, 5 April 2013

2013-04-05T11:39:29Z

RacoonRider at 06:06, 5 April 2013

2013-04-05T06:06:51Z

Enigma at 19:08, 4 April 2013

2013-04-04T19:08:43Z

RacoonRider at 18:39, 4 April 2013

2013-04-04T18:39:08Z

RacoonRider at 18:38, 4 April 2013

2013-04-04T18:38:05Z

Enigma at 17:43, 4 April 2013

2013-04-04T17:43:07Z

Enigma at 17:42, 4 April 2013

2013-04-04T17:42:54Z

RacoonRider at 17:06, 4 April 2013

2013-04-04T17:06:32Z

RacoonRider at 17:06, 4 April 2013

2013-04-04T17:06:10Z

@@ Line 33: / Line 33: @@
 Forgot to mention that SIMMS work in pairs. However, that's only partially true for EDO, on 2 of 3 boards I posess EDO RAM works well without the same stick in the adjacent slot.--[[User:RacoonRider|RacoonRider]] ([[User talk:RacoonRider|talk]]) 17:06, 5 April 2013 (EST)
 A pair means same memory organization. It doesn't mean that it has to be the same manufacturer. Of course the risk is higher with different manufacturers to choose mismatched sticks. But this can be seen by the amount of detected memory.
 Maybe it is also worth to mention that 430VX started to support EDO, while 430FX f.e. did not. And what about S7 boards supporting BEDO?[[User:Enigma|Enigma]] ([[User talk:Enigma|talk]]) 22:39, 5 April 2013 (EST)

← Older revision		Revision as of 11:39, 5 April 2013
Line 33:		Line 33:

	Forgot to mention that SIMMS work in pairs. However, that's only partially true for EDO, on 2 of 3 boards I posess EDO RAM works well without the same stick in the adjacent slot.--[[User:RacoonRider\|RacoonRider]] ([[User talk:RacoonRider\|talk]]) 17:06, 5 April 2013 (EST)		Forgot to mention that SIMMS work in pairs. However, that's only partially true for EDO, on 2 of 3 boards I posess EDO RAM works well without the same stick in the adjacent slot.--[[User:RacoonRider\|RacoonRider]] ([[User talk:RacoonRider\|talk]]) 17:06, 5 April 2013 (EST)
		+	A pair means same memory organization. It doesn't mean that it has to be the same manufacturer. Of course the risk is higher with different manufacturers to choose mismatched sticks. But this can be seen by the amount of detected memory.
		+	Maybe it is also worth to mention that 430VX started to support EDO, while 430FX f.e. did not. And what about S7 boards supporting BEDO?[[User:Enigma\|Enigma]] ([[User talk:Enigma\|talk]]) 22:39, 5 April 2013 (EST)

← Older revision		Revision as of 06:06, 5 April 2013
Line 31:		Line 31:

	Well, most importantly that PS/2 SIMMs have to be plugged as pairs in S7 systems is missing. The 3.3V vs. 5V issue is not too critical as most memory chips support the whole voltage range. The heat dissipation as written should be considered. The golden rule for SDRAM is to choose DIMMs with a lot of ICs for high capacities. On the other hand it may not be a problem if only a partial capacity is detected. I would always recommend to run memtest86 at least 1-pass for a large memory setup to find out if chipset and DIMMs work in combination. PS/2 SIMMs are usually not problematic regarding memory layouts exceeding the memory controllers specs.[[User:Enigma\|Enigma]] ([[User talk:Enigma\|talk]]) 06:08, 5 April 2013 (EST)		Well, most importantly that PS/2 SIMMs have to be plugged as pairs in S7 systems is missing. The 3.3V vs. 5V issue is not too critical as most memory chips support the whole voltage range. The heat dissipation as written should be considered. The golden rule for SDRAM is to choose DIMMs with a lot of ICs for high capacities. On the other hand it may not be a problem if only a partial capacity is detected. I would always recommend to run memtest86 at least 1-pass for a large memory setup to find out if chipset and DIMMs work in combination. PS/2 SIMMs are usually not problematic regarding memory layouts exceeding the memory controllers specs.[[User:Enigma\|Enigma]] ([[User talk:Enigma\|talk]]) 06:08, 5 April 2013 (EST)
		+
		+	Forgot to mention that SIMMS work in pairs. However, that's only partially true for EDO, on 2 of 3 boards I posess EDO RAM works well without the same stick in the adjacent slot.--[[User:RacoonRider\|RacoonRider]] ([[User talk:RacoonRider\|talk]]) 17:06, 5 April 2013 (EST)

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:08, 4 April 2013
Line 29:		Line 29:
	And what do you think of RAM paragraph?		And what do you think of RAM paragraph?
	--[[User:RacoonRider\|RacoonRider]] ([[User talk:RacoonRider\|talk]]) 05:38, 5 April 2013 (EST)		--[[User:RacoonRider\|RacoonRider]] ([[User talk:RacoonRider\|talk]]) 05:38, 5 April 2013 (EST)
		+
		+	Well, most importantly that PS/2 SIMMs have to be plugged as pairs in S7 systems is missing. The 3.3V vs. 5V issue is not too critical as most memory chips support the whole voltage range. The heat dissipation as written should be considered. The golden rule for SDRAM is to choose DIMMs with a lot of ICs for high capacities. On the other hand it may not be a problem if only a partial capacity is detected. I would always recommend to run memtest86 at least 1-pass for a large memory setup to find out if chipset and DIMMs work in combination. PS/2 SIMMs are usually not problematic regarding memory layouts exceeding the memory controllers specs.[[User:Enigma\|Enigma]] ([[User talk:Enigma\|talk]]) 06:08, 5 April 2013 (EST)

@@ Line 25: / Line 25: @@
 [[User:Enigma|Enigma]] ([[User talk:Enigma|talk]]) 04:43, 5 April 2013 (EST)
-Ok, I think, I got your point:) I really appreciate your attitude, it's pretty much scientifical and seems to oppose any kind of "holy war". I changed a few lines in hope this would be the most adequate angle, at which the user would know what he's dealing with, but would not worry much in case it works OK. Still, I think that the owner of the actual hardware should have the final word here. By the way, can you provide some benchmark results for the special section? They really lack data collected from non-intel chipsets.
+Ok, I think, I got your point:) I really appreciate your attitude, it's pretty much scientifical and seems to oppose any kind of "holy war". I changed a few lines in hope this would be the most adequate angle, at which the user would know what he's dealing with, but would not worry much in case it works OK. Still, I think that the owner of the actual hardware should have the final word here. By the way, can you provide some benchmark results for the special section? It really lacks data collected from non-intel chipsets.
 And what do you think of RAM paragraph?
 --[[User:RacoonRider|RacoonRider]] ([[User talk:RacoonRider|talk]]) 05:38, 5 April 2013 (EST)

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:38, 4 April 2013
Line 24:		Line 24:
	However, today the focus whats important is different. If you get such a board and it still works then it is still a Socket 7 system. If performance matters just get another board. No manufacturer knows how the defective rates change after 20 years.		However, today the focus whats important is different. If you get such a board and it still works then it is still a Socket 7 system. If performance matters just get another board. No manufacturer knows how the defective rates change after 20 years.
	[[User:Enigma\|Enigma]] ([[User talk:Enigma\|talk]]) 04:43, 5 April 2013 (EST)		[[User:Enigma\|Enigma]] ([[User talk:Enigma\|talk]]) 04:43, 5 April 2013 (EST)
		+
		+	Ok, I think, I got your point:) I really appreciate your attitude, it's pretty much scientifical and seems to oppose any kind of "holy war". I changed a few lines in hope this would be the most adequate angle, at which the user would know what he's dealing with, but would not worry much in case it works OK. Still, I think that the owner of the actual hardware should have the final word here. By the way, can you provide some benchmark results for the special section? They really lack data collected from non-intel chipsets.
		+
		+	And what do you think of RAM paragraph?
		+	--[[User:RacoonRider\|RacoonRider]] ([[User talk:RacoonRider\|talk]]) 05:38, 5 April 2013 (EST)

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:43, 4 April 2013
Line 23:		Line 23:

	However, today the focus whats important is different. If you get such a board and it still works then it is still a Socket 7 system. If performance matters just get another board. No manufacturer knows how the defective rates change after 20 years.		However, today the focus whats important is different. If you get such a board and it still works then it is still a Socket 7 system. If performance matters just get another board. No manufacturer knows how the defective rates change after 20 years.
		+	[[User:Enigma\|Enigma]] ([[User talk:Enigma\|talk]]) 04:43, 5 April 2013 (EST)

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:42, 4 April 2013
Line 19:		Line 19:
	''Second, they are made by PC Chips, renowned as the industry's cheapest, lowest-quality manufacturer. Their defective rates are legendary, between 10-15% in an industry where 5% or less is considered good. PC Chips was also the originator of putting "fake" plastic cache chips on motherboards. With these VX Pro boards you really do get what you pay for. ... The price is unbeatable, but price has always been PC Chip's sole selling point. ... Why would you buy a motherboard made by the industry's absolute lowest bidder?''		''Second, they are made by PC Chips, renowned as the industry's cheapest, lowest-quality manufacturer. Their defective rates are legendary, between 10-15% in an industry where 5% or less is considered good. PC Chips was also the originator of putting "fake" plastic cache chips on motherboards. With these VX Pro boards you really do get what you pay for. ... The price is unbeatable, but price has always been PC Chip's sole selling point. ... Why would you buy a motherboard made by the industry's absolute lowest bidder?''
	--[[User:RacoonRider\|RacoonRider]] ([[User talk:RacoonRider\|talk]]) 04:06, 5 April 2013 (EST)		--[[User:RacoonRider\|RacoonRider]] ([[User talk:RacoonRider\|talk]]) 04:06, 5 April 2013 (EST)
		+
		+	I read this. My interpretation of this text is that they extend the prior defective rates to the at this time new VX Pro boards. For me this is rather speculative. It could has been as well that while the boards were cheap the defective rates were ok, especially since the TX Pro worked well. But maybe some native english speaker reads there something between the lines.
		+
		+	However, today the focus whats important is different. If you get such a board and it still works then it is still a Socket 7 system. If performance matters just get another board. No manufacturer knows how the defective rates change after 20 years.

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:06, 4 April 2013
Line 16:		Line 16:

	As a matter of fact, there is. http://redhill.net.au/b/b-bad.html		As a matter of fact, there is. http://redhill.net.au/b/b-bad.html
		+
	''Second, they are made by PC Chips, renowned as the industry's cheapest, lowest-quality manufacturer. Their defective rates are legendary, between 10-15% in an industry where 5% or less is considered good. PC Chips was also the originator of putting "fake" plastic cache chips on motherboards. With these VX Pro boards you really do get what you pay for. ... The price is unbeatable, but price has always been PC Chip's sole selling point. ... Why would you buy a motherboard made by the industry's absolute lowest bidder?''		''Second, they are made by PC Chips, renowned as the industry's cheapest, lowest-quality manufacturer. Their defective rates are legendary, between 10-15% in an industry where 5% or less is considered good. PC Chips was also the originator of putting "fake" plastic cache chips on motherboards. With these VX Pro boards you really do get what you pay for. ... The price is unbeatable, but price has always been PC Chip's sole selling point. ... Why would you buy a motherboard made by the industry's absolute lowest bidder?''
		+	--[[User:RacoonRider\|RacoonRider]] ([[User talk:RacoonRider\|talk]]) 04:06, 5 April 2013 (EST)

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:06, 4 April 2013
Line 14:		Line 14:
	So I would change the argumentation this way, that the boards were manufactured by PC Chips, a company that is known to use lowest quality components. I would not mention defect rates for these boards, as I do not know them and there is no source for defect rates.		So I would change the argumentation this way, that the boards were manufactured by PC Chips, a company that is known to use lowest quality components. I would not mention defect rates for these boards, as I do not know them and there is no source for defect rates.
	[[User:Enigma\|Enigma]] ([[User talk:Enigma\|talk]]) 02:12, 5 April 2013 (EST)		[[User:Enigma\|Enigma]] ([[User talk:Enigma\|talk]]) 02:12, 5 April 2013 (EST)
		+
		+	As a matter of fact, there is. http://redhill.net.au/b/b-bad.html
		+	''Second, they are made by PC Chips, renowned as the industry's cheapest, lowest-quality manufacturer. Their defective rates are legendary, between 10-15% in an industry where 5% or less is considered good. PC Chips was also the originator of putting "fake" plastic cache chips on motherboards. With these VX Pro boards you really do get what you pay for. ... The price is unbeatable, but price has always been PC Chip's sole selling point. ... Why would you buy a motherboard made by the industry's absolute lowest bidder?''