Re: [expert] VIA vs Intel
And I have the opposite problem with the VIA MVP3.. Linux doesn't work great..in fact it barely works at all. Sooner or later I will find the root cause, but in the meantime is sure is a frustrating standing on the outside looking in. Pj At 12:21 PM 7/3/00 -0600, you wrote: >The ETEQ chipset is a remaned VIA Apollo MVP3. I have a cheap motherboard with >this chipset and I've had absolutely no problems with any OS, except Win99 >(yeah, me too!). Maybe there's some incompatibility between win98 and the MVP3. >In linux it works great, no problems at all. > >Matt Stegman, escribió: >> Not exactly what you were asking for, but I thought I'd add that I have a >> SOYO Socket 7 motherboard which uses the ETEQ chipset. I can't find much >> documentation on it anywhere, but I've never had a problem with it. It >> works spectacularly. Mine supports PC100 SDRAM, AGP2x, and runs an AMD >> 300MHz CPU on a 100MHz FSB. It was definitely cheaper than Intel >> solutions (that's why I bought it) and it has turned out to work great in >> every OS I've tried (with the sole exception of Windows 98). It runs >> NT 4.0, Windows 95, Linux, and BeOS. I didn't try very hard to track down >> my Win98 problem; that may or may not be related to the motherboard. With >> any other OS, I didn't have to jump through any hoops at all to get things >> to work. >> >> -Matt Stegman >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> >-- > >*Guillermo Belli-Linux User #121340* >* ICQ #38321312* >*http://sites.netscape.net/memo81 (en construccion)* > > > >
Re: [expert] VIA vs Intel
The ETEQ chipset is a remaned VIA Apollo MVP3. I have a cheap motherboard with this chipset and I've had absolutely no problems with any OS, except Win99 (yeah, me too!). Maybe there's some incompatibility between win98 and the MVP3. In linux it works great, no problems at all. Matt Stegman, escribió: > Not exactly what you were asking for, but I thought I'd add that I have a > SOYO Socket 7 motherboard which uses the ETEQ chipset. I can't find much > documentation on it anywhere, but I've never had a problem with it. It > works spectacularly. Mine supports PC100 SDRAM, AGP2x, and runs an AMD > 300MHz CPU on a 100MHz FSB. It was definitely cheaper than Intel > solutions (that's why I bought it) and it has turned out to work great in > every OS I've tried (with the sole exception of Windows 98). It runs > NT 4.0, Windows 95, Linux, and BeOS. I didn't try very hard to track down > my Win98 problem; that may or may not be related to the motherboard. With > any other OS, I didn't have to jump through any hoops at all to get things > to work. > > -Matt Stegman > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > -- *Guillermo Belli-Linux User #121340* * ICQ #38321312* *http://sites.netscape.net/memo81 (en construccion)*
Re: [expert] VIA vs Intel
Not exactly what you were asking for, but I thought I'd add that I have a SOYO Socket 7 motherboard which uses the ETEQ chipset. I can't find much documentation on it anywhere, but I've never had a problem with it. It works spectacularly. Mine supports PC100 SDRAM, AGP2x, and runs an AMD 300MHz CPU on a 100MHz FSB. It was definitely cheaper than Intel solutions (that's why I bought it) and it has turned out to work great in every OS I've tried (with the sole exception of Windows 98). It runs NT 4.0, Windows 95, Linux, and BeOS. I didn't try very hard to track down my Win98 problem; that may or may not be related to the motherboard. With any other OS, I didn't have to jump through any hoops at all to get things to work. -Matt Stegman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> On Sat, 1 Jul 2000, Pj wrote: > I've just been having this discussion with some friends. I have a Tyan > 1590s with a VIA chipset. I have P-100 RAM and a K2-500CPU. It's hot; it's > fast; it'a a slot 7 board. Whether or not I can make a stable Linux system > out of it using my hardware remains to be seen. A local fellow builds Linux > networks. He favors BX boards and Intel P3 chips. > > If I had the money to do this over again, I would talk to Civileme, and > Dave and Brian, and Ramon and I would buy exactly what they recommended- > from the dealers they recommend. I would close my ears to all other > suggestions. Maybe then I would have a stable system instead of another > linux mess. Be warned. Windows is a toy compared to Linux. > > Pj > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > At 02:46 PM 6/30/00 MYT, you wrote: > >Hi. > >How is the performance of VIA chipset based MOBO, compared to Intel based. > >Lets say, BX vs VIA, or i810 vs VIA ? > > > >Which one faster ? > > > >-lz > > > > > > > >Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com > > > > > > >
Re: [expert] VIA vs Intel
Tell that to my normally easy to install USR Sportser modem and mobo built-in Yamaha OPL3-SA3 sound card...and the PnP and non-PnP game we had to play with this mobo :) Bambi Dave Lers wrote: > On Sun, 02 Jul 2000, Fran Parker wrote: > > Faster or not is not the issue...skip the VIA chipset! > > Been there, done that! I have a VIA chipset and > > unless they have made it more multi-OS friendly > > than my VIA chipset, skip it! The one I have was > > built for Windows > > Well I have 3 different VIA systems (aprox 3yrs to 6mo old, one > running a Winchip) and one Intel system and I have noticed zero > difference related to installing/using Linux. I've swapped drives > between VIA and Intel without a hitch. It seems like most problems > are whats plugged into the motherboard/system not the > motherboards/chipsets.
Re: [expert] VIA vs Intel
On Sun, 02 Jul 2000, Fran Parker wrote: > Faster or not is not the issue...skip the VIA chipset! > Been there, done that! I have a VIA chipset and > unless they have made it more multi-OS friendly > than my VIA chipset, skip it! The one I have was > built for Windows Well I have 3 different VIA systems (aprox 3yrs to 6mo old, one running a Winchip) and one Intel system and I have noticed zero difference related to installing/using Linux. I've swapped drives between VIA and Intel without a hitch. It seems like most problems are whats plugged into the motherboard/system not the motherboards/chipsets.
Re: [expert] VIA vs Intel
Faster or not is not the issue...skip the VIA chipset! Been there, done that! I have a VIA chipset and unless they have made it more multi-OS friendly than my VIA chipset, skip it! The one I have was built for Windows and we had a heck of a time getting it to work with Linux. It is finally working and working great, but if you are a newbie in Linux as I was, you had better have an inovative Linux Guru to work with you on it. I installed three times before my Jim (my Guru) stepped in and saved my sanity and my install! Bambi Lang Zhi wrote: > Hi. > How is the performance of VIA chipset based MOBO, compared to Intel based. > Lets say, BX vs VIA, or i810 vs VIA ? > > Which one faster ? > > -lz > > > Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com
Re: [expert] VIA vs Intel
On Sat, 1 Jul 2000, Civileme wrote: [SNIP] > The KTX133 is something Intel has no equivalent for and is a A correction here: there is the 'Classic' KX133 VIA chipset & the new (which is referred to throughout this mail) KT133 VIA chipset for the ' "optimal" processor feature '. This 'feature' means the cache runs at full bus speed verses the 'Classic', which ran at a ratio (2/5).. > hefty performer. No data available on long-term reliability. No > chipset before this had the "optimal" processor feature which > will drive the bus and the processor as fast as it can without > getting data corruption. Also, the interesting interlace done to > run PC100 memory on a 200MHz bus puts this one head and shoulders The bus is running at 100Mhz, which matches the memory; it's the Front Side Bus (FSB) which runs at the 200Mhz. > above the crowd. It seems good enough that ASUS is using it. To my knowledge, ASUS is using the 'Classic' KX133 VIA chipset, and no board using the new KT133 VIA chipset is on their web page for sale or is mentioned as being in production. > Of course Chipsets are also married to processors or at least > processor families. > > We have in the mainstream right now the following families, > separated by their connections > > Socket 7 Pentium, MMX, IDT C6-x, Cyrix(VIA) > AMD K5, K6, rise mP6 > > Socket 370 Celeron, P-III Coppermine > > Socket A Duron, Athlon Thunderbird > > Slot-1 Older Celeron, Pentium II, III > > Slot-2 Xeon II III > > Slot-A Athlon 'Classic' would be a good addition to the Athlon line above. > There are of course other chipset manufacturers. ALi Aladdin > chipsets are used in many boards. Most of them have had BIOS > updates to accurately detect some IDE devices, but otherwise they > seem to do well at standard clock rates. SiS does some highly > integrated stuff, and as long as you don't get it served to you > on a very cheap board (like PCChips) those chipsets seem to be > the most reliable around (at standard clock rates). I have a > Shuttle HOT-599 placed in service February, 1999. It is running > a refrigerated K6-2 450 at standard 100MHz FSB and is a heavily > loaded workgroup server. Since. It was rebooted once when the > 56K modem was changed to a cheap ethernet card for a DSL, and > twice more when the server software was shifted to mdk 6.1 and to > 7.1. > > If you want the fastest available without getting into 64-bit > processors, the VIA KTX133 and Athlon Thunderbird can race past Again, this should be KT133 VIA chipset. The only motherboard using this new chipset (and new socket, verses the old Athlon Slot) is by FiC, and it's the AZ-11; an updated SD-11 with the new chipset. > all else. You can beat Pentium III Coppermine 1GHz with only a > 900MHz Thunderbird and you CAN buy THunderbirds up to 1GHz this > week. (who knows what it will be next week) > > > http://sysopt.earthweb.com/userreviews/products/mboards.html > > Has ratings by users for many motherboards. User ratings as > opposed to technical give an index of not only how wonderful the > features are but also how much hassle it is to reap those > benefits. Most of the raters are technically competent to some > degree because in order to rate a MB you are probably building > your own computer. Extreme technical competemce is not required > but you can figure that most of these users will not draw to an > inside strait unless nobody's betting. > > YEs, it depends. The chipset resides on a motherboard and it > works with a processor. Find a GOOD (read reliable) motherboard > (or several good ones) then look for the chipset you think works > the best. > > And for the speed issue--if the base system > (mobo+memory+processor) works at an index of 3677 (where the > original IBM-PC 8088 at 4.77MHz and 0.2 Bogomips is the index of > 1) and you still have to load a 45Mb program like StarOffice > Bloatware from disk, are you going to see any improvement over a > base system with an index of 1200? Not likely. > > If you are rendering 3D graphics with a specialized program and > DDR Geforce interfaces and all--would you be better served with a > single hot processor on a base system or a cluster of processors > in a parallel-processing system? Both can come to about the same > cost, or the supercomputer can be cheaper (as Oak Ridge National > Laboratory demonstrated with Stonesoup, a Beowulf made from > donated computers). > > Well, I hope this is helpful in answering what appears to be a > simple question. You will, of course, find a better answer for > your purposes by researching the matter yourself, but perhaps > this can serve as a way to structure how you go about it. > > Civileme > -- | d a v i d @ m i h m | dmihm @ swbell.net | webmaster @ afterstep.org | ftpmaster @ afterstep.org | dmihm @ rchitecture.com | ww
Re: [expert] VIA vs Intel
On Sat, 01 Jul 2000 14:09:02 -0500, Pj wrote: >If I had the money to do this over again, I would talk to Civileme, and >Dave and Brian, and Ramon and I would buy exactly what they recommended- >from the dealers they recommend. I would close my ears to all other >suggestions. Maybe then I would have a stable system instead of another >linux mess. Be warned. Windows is a toy compared to Linux. > >Pj >[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sat, 1 Jul 2000 17:25:02 It is funny you should mention this Pj, I did your first suggestion yesterdayand now I think I shall follow your second recommendation also. Olly P Biloxi Ms
Re: [expert] VIA vs Intel
Lang Zhi wrote: > > Hi. > How is the performance of VIA chipset based MOBO, compared to Intel based. > Lets say, BX vs VIA, or i810 vs VIA ? > > Which one faster ? > > -lz > > The answer, as with most answers, is, --==it depends==-- The i810 works better with memory specifically designed and/or certified for it. VIA chipsets aren't so cranky about memory. BX is a pretty good chipset, and my experience is that VIA can't match its reliability ... Intel got lucky? The GX chipset is something VIA has no equivalent for. The KTX133 is something Intel has no equivalent for and is a hefty performer. No data available on long-term reliability. No chipset before this had the "optimal" processor feature which will drive the bus and the processor as fast as it can without getting data corruption. Also, the interesting interlace done to run PC100 memory on a 200MHz bus puts this one head and shoulders above the crowd. It seems good enough that ASUS is using it. Of course Chipsets are also married to processors or at least processor families. We have in the mainstream right now the following families, separated by their connections Socket 7 Pentium, MMX, IDT C6-x, Cyrix(VIA) AMD K5, K6, rise mP6 Socket 370 Celeron, P-III Coppermine Socket A Duron, Athlon Thunderbird Slot-1 Older Celeron, Pentium II, III Slot-2 Xeon II III Slot-A Athlon There are of course other chipset manufacturers. ALi Aladdin chipsets are used in many boards. Most of them have had BIOS updates to accurately detect some IDE devices, but otherwise they seem to do well at standard clock rates. SiS does some highly integrated stuff, and as long as you don't get it served to you on a very cheap board (like PCChips) those chipsets seem to be the most reliable around (at standard clock rates). I have a Shuttle HOT-599 placed in service February, 1999. It is running a refrigerated K6-2 450 at standard 100MHz FSB and is a heavily loaded workgroup server. Since. It was rebooted once when the 56K modem was changed to a cheap ethernet card for a DSL, and twice more when the server software was shifted to mdk 6.1 and to 7.1. If you want the fastest available without getting into 64-bit processors, the VIA KTX133 and Athlon Thunderbird can race past all else. You can beat Pentium III Coppermine 1GHz with only a 900MHz Thunderbird and you CAN buy THunderbirds up to 1GHz this week. (who knows what it will be next week) http://sysopt.earthweb.com/userreviews/products/mboards.html Has ratings by users for many motherboards. User ratings as opposed to technical give an index of not only how wonderful the features are but also how much hassle it is to reap those benefits. Most of the raters are technically competent to some degree because in order to rate a MB you are probably building your own computer. Extreme technical competemce is not required but you can figure that most of these users will not draw to an inside strait unless nobody's betting. YEs, it depends. The chipset resides on a motherboard and it works with a processor. Find a GOOD (read reliable) motherboard (or several good ones) then look for the chipset you think works the best. And for the speed issue--if the base system (mobo+memory+processor) works at an index of 3677 (where the original IBM-PC 8088 at 4.77MHz and 0.2 Bogomips is the index of 1) and you still have to load a 45Mb program like StarOffice Bloatware from disk, are you going to see any improvement over a base system with an index of 1200? Not likely. If you are rendering 3D graphics with a specialized program and DDR Geforce interfaces and all--would you be better served with a single hot processor on a base system or a cluster of processors in a parallel-processing system? Both can come to about the same cost, or the supercomputer can be cheaper (as Oak Ridge National Laboratory demonstrated with Stonesoup, a Beowulf made from donated computers). Well, I hope this is helpful in answering what appears to be a simple question. You will, of course, find a better answer for your purposes by researching the matter yourself, but perhaps this can serve as a way to structure how you go about it. Civileme
