Linux-Hardware Digest #657, Volume #10 Sat, 3 Jul 99 17:13:40 EDT
Contents:
Re: Celeron, what's the catch? (Jeffrey Karp)
Would this be a modem problem? (Rich Jones)
configure display card ("ey")
Re: Windows easy to install? BULLSHIT! (Hobbyist)
configure display card ("ey")
Re: Let's build a perfect Wintel-free PC (Adrian Milliner)
Re: Dell Inspiron compatibility? What is best laptop? (Adrian Hands)
Re: Linux CD COPY ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Celeron, what's the catch? ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Celeron, what's the catch? ("Suleyman Karabuk")
Blaster Banshee AGP and Linux ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: No-name PnP ethernet card ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: RedHat 6.0 Cannot Detect Adaptec 2940U2W
Re: REAL Starfighter AGP video card (Jeff Potter)
Re: Celeron, what's the catch? (kls)
Re: Celeron, what's the catch? ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: intel L440GX+ mb/ PCI66/ UWSCSI/ thernet/video (Mike Simos)
Re: Metro-x and dual head display ("Keith Bell")
Re: ATAPI Zip Drive Linux 2.0.10 fails (Jonathon)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Jeffrey Karp <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips,comp.sys.intel
Subject: Re: Celeron, what's the catch?
Date: Sat, 03 Jul 1999 12:35:31 -0400
It sounds like a K6-3 450 system would be your best choice. Many of
these are quite affordable. If you can stretch your budget, and wait a
month or so, the AMD Athlon(K7) is awesome. The 550 has 46% faster
floating point than a Pentium 3 550, and is much less expensive.
http://www.amd.com/products/cpg/k6iii/k6iiibchmks.html
http://www.cyberpowerpc.com/cyberpower/amd-k6-3-3d-now-system.html
http://www.amd.com/products/cpg/athlon/benchmarks.html
FM wrote:
>
> I'm buying a PC soon for college (from college) and the standard package
> offered (http://www.dartmouth.edu/comp/newstudentinfo/buying/hardware.html)
> is Celeron 433, 6GB, 64MB, 15" (quite the worst point) etc. While I have not
> seen the specs of higher-end systems or the price, but so far it seems that
> this one will fit my budget best (well their systems seemed a bit overpriced
> despite alleged academic discounts;
> http://www.dartmouth.edu/~store/pricelist.html). But before making the
> decision, I'd like some information on Celeron systems since I have some
> reservation about the chip (I guess due to some early criticism I didn't
> really heed but was exposed to nevertheless). First, does it perform as well
> as the benchmarks suggest? I've seen some FPU benchmarks indicating that
> Celeron outperforms similarly clocked PII and some Integer benchmarks where
> it still holds fairly well. But do these benchmarks reflect the overall
> system performance considering the slower bus speed (66mhz) and other
> compromises? Second, are there any particular application areas where
> Celeron fares poorly? For example my hunch is that its design (smaller but
> faster L2 cache) wouldn't favor applications that require intensive but
> repetitive memory/disk access (server? compilers?) but is the difference
> worth noting?
>
> As for my use, it will be primarily used as a desktop Linux machine (Redhat
> 6.0 with GNOME or KDE) with some casual server daemons like http, ftp,
> telnet, etc. Other tasks would include (ordered by approximate
> frequency/priority) wordprocessing, internet client apps,
> programming/compilation, image-manipulation (small-scale for my
> yet-to-be-purchased digital camera and yet-to-be published webpage), MP3
> (incase I can't afford a stereo), fractals, and maybe some chess programs
> (hmm maybe this is where Celeron might show its weaknesses?). I'm not
> planning on playing games much and when I do, I'm unusually tolerant of
> low-res/low-framerate, not to mention that I'm not into modern
> graphic-intensive 3D shootemups (yeah I'm the guy who used to play starcraft
> on P75 overclocked to P100 and didn't find the setup disturbing at all). I
> will also have a 2-gig partition for Win98 for compatibility reasons
> (barring a scenario where I actually get to purchase vmware, which seems
> nice but a bit expensive).
>
> Any answers to any of the above questions or any relevent
> information/point/discussion regarding my inquiry would be extremely
> appreciated. And thanks in advance to those who made it this far through the
> rambling (with all the parenthetic nonsense).
>
> Dan.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Rich Jones)
Subject: Would this be a modem problem?
Date: Sat, 03 Jul 1999 18:47:57 GMT
I have a Zoom 56Kx modem that supports dual-mode 56k-Flex and v90.
It setup fine in Linux, and I had it connecting to my ISP at 56k (usually 40k
to 50k) for roughly about 3 months. Then one day, it stopped working. I
still can connect to the 33.6 lines no problem. I then contacted my ISP about
the problem. They told me it was Linux's problem, that no Windows users
complained about any connection problems.
I then checked the default route, and corrected it so the default route gets
set when ppp0 is active. This solved some of the problems, however the time
to connect to the Internet ranges from 2 minutes to 20 minutes.
I check the logs, and I see the modem has no problem handshaking, and
connecting at the high speeds. The problem lies with the default route trying
to get set. I tried pinging the ppp0 inet address, and sometimes I can ping
it when I connect. But when I try to ping the ptp address of the ppp0
interface, it times out. It waits in this state for quite a long time, then
all of a sudden the route is made and Im online.
Looking at the log files, I see that DialD assigns the IP's, but it seems to
be a problem when the ppp connect garbage starts scrolling. I tried using
minicom to see if it was just scripts doing it, but even manually when I enter
the pppd command it just sits and waits and waits and waits.
I removed the lock setting, and added the noipdefault this seemed to speed
the wait up a tad. Making it connection success a little better.
My ISP stills states they only changed the modem's init strings. I think they
are using 3COM modems as well. Some have suggested maybe the modem needs a
firmware flash. I have tried very basic settings, and found the 56k lines
sometimes connect when the modem drops down to a 33.6 speed.
Does anyone know what I can use to test or reconfigure? Does this look like a
possible hardware error? or mfg protocol error?
I'm stuck at this point, cause the modem seems to be connecting fine, but
maybe its having trouble translating to the other modems.
Any help would greatly be appreciated. :) TIA.
Budman
------------------------------
From: "ey" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: configure display card
Date: Sat, 3 Jul 1999 21:32:00 +0200
Does anyone know how to configure ati 128 32mb with xwindows on redhat 6.0 ?
if someone please e.mail me to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Thanks you.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Hobbyist)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.linux.setup
Subject: Re: Windows easy to install? BULLSHIT!
Date: Sat, 3 Jul 1999 13:38:31 -0500
On Sat, 3 Jul 1999 14:01:01 GMT, Drakmere, in an attempt to show us how
smart and informed he is wrote ...
> First, Microsoft is "Unsupported software" since Bill Gates only releases
> patches when there is a panic.
>
Bullshit.
------------------------------
From: "ey" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: configure display card
Date: Sat, 3 Jul 1999 21:27:32 +0200
Does anyone know how to configure ati 128 32MB with xwindows??
if someone please e.mail me to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Thank you.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Adrian Milliner)
Crossposted-To:
alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt,alt.comp.hardware.homebuiltalt.comp.hardware,comp.sys.be.help,comp.sys.be.misc,comp.os.os2.misc
Subject: Re: Let's build a perfect Wintel-free PC
Date: Sat, 03 Jul 1999 19:36:03 GMT
On Sat, 03 Jul 1999 14:08:22 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Stewart
Honsberger) wrote:
>Quoting a message by [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Adrian Milliner) in comp.os.os2.misc:
>>>This system should be able to reliably run BeOS, Linux and, as an added
>>>bonus, OS/2.
>>
>>Careful, OS/2 was originally created by Microsoft - will that upset
>>your plans to be Wintel free?
>
>FUD - OS/2 has been nearly completely re-written (stripped of 99% of the
>Microsoft code), and is now such a severe threat to the Microsoft empire
>that they took steps to ensure it's failure.
>
>Read up on the MS/DOJ trial - makes for an interesting read. Anything
>Microsoft hates THAT MUCH can't be all that bad. {smile}
Yes, I would certainly hope that OS/2 in it's current form is free of
the original MS code. Now they just need to get rid of the IBM code
:-))
BTW. My favourite trial coverage is at www.theregister.co.uk
------------------------------
From: Adrian Hands <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.portable,comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: Dell Inspiron compatibility? What is best laptop?
Date: Sat, 03 Jul 1999 14:29:52 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Michael Smith wrote:
>
> I'm running RedHat 6.0 on my Inspiron 7000 (ATI Rage video 8mb; 15" LCD;
> etc). X works great without down-grading the BIOS (I had to enable frame
> buffering). An excellent resource is the [Linux Inspiron] mail list, and
> associated web sites. http://inspiron.ntsj.com/ (the web page refers to
> Insp.3500, but the list deals w/ all models).
>
> // Michael
I just put SuSE 6.1 on my wife's new Thinkpad. It's nice, but it looks
like IBM puts useless winmodems on there laptops. Yeesh.
Toshiba is just now setting up a site with info about running Linux on
their laptops.
Dell has supposedly been shipping Linux for some time, but everytime I
get a flyer in the mail from them all I see is M$ BS.
I guess RH should work a SparcBook too ?
------------------------------
Subject: Re: Linux CD COPY
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sat, 03 Jul 1999 19:53:22 GMT
According to Lee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> How do I copy a Linux (retail) CD to a CDR - using Win98 or WinNT 4.0?
Just like you would any Winblows disk.
> Are there any special consideration or technique basically?
Nope.
> I use Adaptec Easy CD Creator Deluxe 3.01.
I think this version is pretty old, but it should work.
> All comments and suggestions welcome. Thanks!
Shame on you for not coping it using Linux!
-p.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips,comp.sys.intel
Subject: Re: Celeron, what's the catch?
Date: Sat, 03 Jul 1999 19:06:42 GMT
Never buy computer systems from a school. They will rob you blind.
In no particular order:
1. Go directly to www.dell.com to check out the latest prices.
2. Check out the local guys from one of the local computer mags.
3. www.valueamerica.com.
4. www.comtrade.com
When you buy out of state, you will not have to pay sale tax.
On Sat, 3 Jul 1999 04:16:38 -0400, "FM" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>I'm buying a PC soon for college (from college) and the standard package
>offered (http://www.dartmouth.edu/comp/newstudentinfo/buying/hardware.html)
>is Celeron 433, 6GB, 64MB, 15" (quite the worst point) etc. While I have not
>seen the specs of higher-end systems or the price, but so far it seems that
>this one will fit my budget best (well their systems seemed a bit overpriced
>despite alleged academic discounts;
>http://www.dartmouth.edu/~store/pricelist.html). But before making the
>decision, I'd like some information on Celeron systems since I have some
>reservation about the chip (I guess due to some early criticism I didn't
>really heed but was exposed to nevertheless). First, does it perform as well
>as the benchmarks suggest? I've seen some FPU benchmarks indicating that
>Celeron outperforms similarly clocked PII and some Integer benchmarks where
>it still holds fairly well. But do these benchmarks reflect the overall
>system performance considering the slower bus speed (66mhz) and other
>compromises? Second, are there any particular application areas where
>Celeron fares poorly? For example my hunch is that its design (smaller but
>faster L2 cache) wouldn't favor applications that require intensive but
>repetitive memory/disk access (server? compilers?) but is the difference
>worth noting?
>
>As for my use, it will be primarily used as a desktop Linux machine (Redhat
>6.0 with GNOME or KDE) with some casual server daemons like http, ftp,
>telnet, etc. Other tasks would include (ordered by approximate
>frequency/priority) wordprocessing, internet client apps,
>programming/compilation, image-manipulation (small-scale for my
>yet-to-be-purchased digital camera and yet-to-be published webpage), MP3
>(incase I can't afford a stereo), fractals, and maybe some chess programs
>(hmm maybe this is where Celeron might show its weaknesses?). I'm not
>planning on playing games much and when I do, I'm unusually tolerant of
>low-res/low-framerate, not to mention that I'm not into modern
>graphic-intensive 3D shootemups (yeah I'm the guy who used to play starcraft
>on P75 overclocked to P100 and didn't find the setup disturbing at all). I
>will also have a 2-gig partition for Win98 for compatibility reasons
>(barring a scenario where I actually get to purchase vmware, which seems
>nice but a bit expensive).
>
>Any answers to any of the above questions or any relevent
>information/point/discussion regarding my inquiry would be extremely
>appreciated. And thanks in advance to those who made it this far through the
>rambling (with all the parenthetic nonsense).
>
>Dan.
>
>
------------------------------
From: "Suleyman Karabuk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips,comp.sys.intel
Subject: Re: Celeron, what's the catch?
Date: Sat, 3 Jul 1999 15:32:17 -0400
But the chess program is going to do a lot of searching (depth first or
breath first) on a search tree, which involves accessing memory frequently
and revisiting previously accessed memory. In this case the L2 cache and the
memory access speed (66 vs 100 Mhz) can make quite a difference. The FPU of
the Celeron is exactly the same a regular Pentium II, so the Celeron loses
from too much memory access. So my guess is that Chess will also perform
about 25% worse.
> Fractals and your CPLEX package probably do lots of floating point
> calculations. The chess program probably doesn't. At least not to the
> extent that a fractal generator would.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: alt.os.linux.mandrake
Subject: Blaster Banshee AGP and Linux
Date: Sat, 03 Jul 1999 20:15:17 GMT
Okay, my video card (MPACT) does not work under linux. That was with
the Caldera distribution. I'm now thinking of installing Mandrake (if
it's easy *hehe*). The COL install wasn't bad I just couldn't see
anything!!
Now, if I get a Blaster Banshee video card, will it work with the
Mandrake 6.0 distribution? Anyone have the Blaster Banshee Video card
working with Mandrake 6.0??
Joe
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: No-name PnP ethernet card
Date: 03 Jul 1999 15:41:45 -0500
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Dominic Hargreaves) writes:
> On Sat, 03 Jul 1999 07:09:58 GMT, Will Schmid <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>
> >How does one configure a PLUG & PLAY ethernet card in slackware 3.5?
> >
> >At startup, BIOS detects it as: NB116P PnP
> >
> >Win 98 device manager says:
> >IRQ: 5
> >I/O: 220
> >
> >Thanks... and excuse me, I'm a newbie.
> >
> >-Will Schmid
> >[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> It is most likely an NE2000 compatible. I don't know what the
> specific installation program is, Redhat uses linuxconf to configure
> the network card modules.
>
> Dominic Hargreaves
> Remove NO and SPAM from address to reply
> http://fly.to/dominic
It it is NE2000, you probably can do this under slakware 3.5:
$ /sbin/modprobe ne io=0x220
If it detects, modify /etc/rc.d/rc.modules, and put the above line in
it, and reboot.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ()
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.os.linux.setup
Subject: Re: RedHat 6.0 Cannot Detect Adaptec 2940U2W
Date: Sat, 3 Jul 1999 12:22:29 -0700
On Sat, 03 Jul 1999 03:38:25 GMT, David M. Cook <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>On Fri, 02 Jul 1999 02:10:25 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>wrote:
>
>>I have tried using the latest Linux boot disk from the Red Hat web
>>site, and then I used the CD-Rom for installation (Adaptec 2940U2W
>>stalled)
>
>You could try the no_probe or no_reset parameters (e.g. aic7xxx=no_probe).
>However, I suspect this is a problem with the present install kernel.
>
>According to their errata page, a new boot image is in the works that should
>fix this and should be available RSN. If you want Linux ASAP, try a
>non-Redhat based distribution like SUSE or Debian.
So? The 2940 is a known problem with Redhat6? Yesterday, a
colleagues machine with a 2940 was having a bit of trouble
with SIGEMTs while installing Redhat6.
--
It helps the car, in terms of end user complexity and engineering,
that a car is not expected to suddenly become wood chipper at some |||
arbitrary point as it's rolling down the road. / | \
Seeking sane PPP Docs? Try http://penguin.lvcm.com
------------------------------
From: Jeff Potter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: REAL Starfighter AGP video card
Date: Sat, 03 Jul 1999 20:07:19 +0000
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> I am new to Linux and have installed Red Hat 6.0.
>
> My REAL Starfighter AGP video card though is not a recognized card.
> When I run XWindows the image is at a weird resolution (like 100x80).
> If anyone is using the card if they could help me with the setup
> parameters, I would appreciate it.
Try the X Server from Precision Insight (
http://www.precisioninsight.com ).
The file you want is named XFCom-i740-glibc-1.1.0-1.i386 located here:
ftp://ftp.precisioninsight.com/pub/pi/XFCom/XFCom-i740-glibc-1.1.0-1.i386.rpm
also get:
ftp://ftp.precisioninsight.com/pub/pi/XFCom/xf86config-glibc-1.1.0.i386.tgz
Follow the instructions after decompressing the .tgz file. The .rpm
file
should install correctly. I had marginal success with the "automatic"
XF86Config created, and had to hand-edit some modelines.
Try the following lines in your XF86Config under Section "Monitor" (as
the only
modelines):
# 1024x768 @ 75 Hz standard
Modeline "1024x768" 78.72 1024 1056 1152 1312 768 769 772 800
# 800x600 @ 75 Hz standard
Modeline "800x600" 49.5 800 816 896 1056 600 601 604 625
# 640x480 @ 75 Hz, 37.50 kHz
ModeLine "640x480" 31.5 640 676 740 840 480 481 484 500
# 1152x864 @ 75 Hz standard
Modeline "1152x864" 108.0 1152 1216 1344 1600 864 865 868 900
# 1280x1024 @ 75 Hz standard
Modeline "1280x1024" 135.0 1280 1296 1440 1688 1024 1025 1028 1066
Then for the Screens, use the following:
# The Colour SVGA server
Section "Screen"
Driver "svga"
Device "Real 3D Starfighter AGP"
DefaultColorDepth 16
Monitor "OptiQuest V775"
Subsection "Display"
Depth 8
# Omit the Modes line for the "Generic VGA" device
Modes "1024x768" "800x600" "640x480"
ViewPort 0 0
# Use Virtual 320 200 for Generic VGA
EndSubsection
Subsection "Display"
Depth 16
Modes "1024x768" "800x600" "640x480"
ViewPort 0 0
EndSubsection
Subsection "Display"
Depth 24
Modes "1024x768" "800x600" "640x480"
ViewPort 0 0
EndSubsection
Subsection "Display"
Depth 32
Modes "1024x768" "800x600" "640x480"
ViewPort 0 0
EndSubsection
EndSection
# Accelerated Server
Section "Screen"
Driver "accel"
Device "Real 3D Starfighter AGP"
DefaultColorDepth 16
Monitor "OptiQuest V775"
Subsection "Display"
Depth 8
Modes "1024x768" "800x600" "640x480"
ViewPort 0 0
EndSubsection
Subsection "Display"
Depth 16
Modes "1024x768" "800x600" "640x480"
ViewPort 0 0
EndSubsection
Subsection "Display"
Depth 24
Modes "1024x768" "800x600" "640x480"
ViewPort 0 0
EndSubsection
Subsection "Display"
Depth 32
Modes "1024x768" "800x600" "640x480"
ViewPort 0 0
EndSubsection
EndSection
Substitute the monitor you defined earlier in the file for my "OptiQuest
V775."
The DefaultColorDepth will set it up so that "startx" will launch you
directly
into 16 bpp.
Jeff Potter
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (kls)
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips,comp.sys.intel
Subject: Re: Celeron, what's the catch?
Date: Sat, 03 Jul 1999 20:30:57 GMT
In article <377e5e90.7050127@news-server>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] says...
>
>
>Never buy computer systems from a school. They will rob you blind.
>
>In no particular order:
>
>1. Go directly to www.dell.com to check out the latest prices.
>2. Check out the local guys from one of the local computer mags.
>3. www.valueamerica.com.
>4. www.comtrade.com
5. Build your own. It's cheaper & you can get what you want. Setting up
linux is harder.
>When you buy out of state, you will not have to pay sale tax.
For now. Seems local vendors have been whining it's not fair. Their answer
is to persuade gov., now here's a hard sale, to tax sales over the internet,
there by helping to shift business back their way with the thinking many will
find taxes + shipping too much(which is they same argument against doing so).
>On Sat, 3 Jul 1999 04:16:38 -0400, "FM" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>>I'm buying a PC soon for college (from college) and the standard package
>>offered (http://www.dartmouth.edu/comp/newstudentinfo/buying/hardware.html)
>>is Celeron 433, 6GB, 64MB, 15" (quite the worst point) etc. While I have not
>>seen the specs of higher-end systems or the price, but so far it seems that
>>this one will fit my budget best (well their systems seemed a bit overpriced
>>despite alleged academic discounts;
>>http://www.dartmouth.edu/~store/pricelist.html). But before making the
>>decision, I'd like some information on Celeron systems since I have some
>>reservation about the chip (I guess due to some early criticism I didn't
>>really heed but was exposed to nevertheless). First, does it perform as well
>>as the benchmarks suggest? I've seen some FPU benchmarks indicating that
>>Celeron outperforms similarly clocked PII and some Integer benchmarks where
>>it still holds fairly well. But do these benchmarks reflect the overall
>>system performance considering the slower bus speed (66mhz) and other
>>compromises? Second, are there any particular application areas where
>>Celeron fares poorly? For example my hunch is that its design (smaller but
>>faster L2 cache) wouldn't favor applications that require intensive but
>>repetitive memory/disk access (server? compilers?) but is the difference
>>worth noting?
>>
>>As for my use, it will be primarily used as a desktop Linux machine (Redhat
>>6.0 with GNOME or KDE) with some casual server daemons like http, ftp,
>>telnet, etc. Other tasks would include (ordered by approximate
>>frequency/priority) wordprocessing, internet client apps,
>>programming/compilation, image-manipulation (small-scale for my
>>yet-to-be-purchased digital camera and yet-to-be published webpage), MP3
>>(incase I can't afford a stereo), fractals, and maybe some chess programs
>>(hmm maybe this is where Celeron might show its weaknesses?). I'm not
>>planning on playing games much and when I do, I'm unusually tolerant of
>>low-res/low-framerate, not to mention that I'm not into modern
>>graphic-intensive 3D shootemups (yeah I'm the guy who used to play starcraft
>>on P75 overclocked to P100 and didn't find the setup disturbing at all). I
>>will also have a 2-gig partition for Win98 for compatibility reasons
>>(barring a scenario where I actually get to purchase vmware, which seems
>>nice but a bit expensive).
>>
>>Any answers to any of the above questions or any relevent
>>information/point/discussion regarding my inquiry would be extremely
>>appreciated. And thanks in advance to those who made it this far through the
>>rambling (with all the parenthetic nonsense).
>>
>>Dan.
>>
>>
>
------------------------------
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips,comp.sys.intel
Subject: Re: Celeron, what's the catch?
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sat, 03 Jul 1999 20:06:34 GMT
According to FM <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> I'm buying a PC soon for college (from college) and the standard package
> offered (http://www.dartmouth.edu/comp/newstudentinfo/buying/hardware.html)
> is Celeron 433, 6GB, 64MB, 15" (quite the worst point) etc. While I have not
> seen the specs of higher-end systems or the price, but so far it seems that
> this one will fit my budget best (well their systems seemed a bit overpriced
> despite alleged academic discounts;
Systems purchased through the university or bookstore are almost
always way overpriced. You are much better off going to your local
no-name computer store and putting something together yourself.
> http://www.dartmouth.edu/~store/pricelist.html). But before making the
> decision, I'd like some information on Celeron systems since I have some
> reservation about the chip (I guess due to some early criticism I didn't
> really heed but was exposed to nevertheless). First, does it perform as well
> as the benchmarks suggest?
In the real world, the Celeron outperforms a PII of the same speed. I
have two Linux boxes, the first based on an Abhit BH6 and a Celeron
333 and the second based on an Intel DK with Dual P2-333s. The
Celeron machine is actually about 10% *faster* overall compared to the
P2 machine when running in non-SMP mode.
The reason for this is simple -- although the Celeron does not have as
much cache as the P2, the cache that it does have runs twice as fast.
In addition to that, cache management is somewhat lower, and as it
turns out, 128K of cache is close to optimal for general use.
The only time you will really see an improvement with the P2 over the
celeron is when you have an application that can run completely within
the 512K cache that never gets swapped out of the cache. The only
time this ever really happens in the real world is during (1)
benchmarking and (2) very specialized scientific applications.
Now, if you factor in the fact that you can easily overclock an $80
Celeron 300 to 450 Mhz, the choice of which CPU to choose is a
no-brainer. (Personally, I don't overclock, but many people swear
that it is completely reliable.)
-p.
------------------------------
From: Mike Simos <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: intel L440GX+ mb/ PCI66/ UWSCSI/ thernet/video
Date: Sat, 03 Jul 1999 20:50:22 GMT
Greg Bartels wrote:
> anyone using the Intel L440GX+ motherboard?
> anyone using it with Linux?
>
I am using RedHat 6.0 with this motherboard at work. I like this
motherboard a lot, but its more
designed for a server then a desktop. Everything is detected and works
under Linux. Because
there is no AGP port on this you'll need to use a PCI video card if you
don't want to use the on
board video card. A word to the wise do not plug in 33mhz pci cards into
the 66mhz pci
slots because from what I have heard the cards will run a bit slower
then normal. The on board
video card can be overridden just by placing a video card into a pci
slot. However you'll have
to be careful because some distributions that detect your video card may
detect the on board
video card instead of the one you installed. So your best bet is to
manually select what video card
you have during the installation phase. Like I said before I like this
motherboard and it is quite
fast, but I would probably go with another motherboard if you primarily
want to use it as a desktop computer.
Mike
------------------------------
From: "Keith Bell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Metro-x and dual head display
Date: Sat, 3 Jul 1999 13:52:19 -0700
MetroX only supports the Matrox cards. As of MetroX 4.3.3 you can use any
combination of Matrox cards( up to 4 by default).
http://www.metrolink.com/supportindex.html
Bryan wrote in message ...
>anyone have any luck with Metro-X and dual headed x-servers?
>
>which cards did you use? what was the motherboard?
>
>thanks,
>
>--
>Bryan, http://www.Grateful.Net - Linux/Web-based Network Management
>->->-> to email me, you must hunt the WUMPUS and kill it.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jonathon)
Subject: Re: ATAPI Zip Drive Linux 2.0.10 fails
Date: 3 Jul 1999 20:27:13 GMT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
: linux detects it, but it cannot see any partition on zip disks, and thus
: one cannot mount it or read information off of zip disks. I think these
Assuming you meant the 100 MB Zip Drive.
For some weird reason, they are usable as VFAT disks only.
Expect 25% of the new disks you buy to fail.
If Win95/98/NT does _anything_ to the disk, expect it
to fail. << That includes writing data to the disk. >>
By fail, I mean it will not be readable by Linux. They are
still usable on Win* machines though. I haven't had time to
try to figure out why this occurs, but it does.
xan
jonathon
--
I'm still looking for a good book on
3: The Recent Unpleasantness
1: The War Of Northern Aggression.
2: The War of Southern Rebellion.
------------------------------
** FOR YOUR REFERENCE **
The service address, to which questions about the list itself and requests
to be added to or deleted from it should be directed, is:
Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
You can send mail to the entire list (and comp.os.linux.hardware) via:
Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Linux may be obtained via one of these FTP sites:
ftp.funet.fi pub/Linux
tsx-11.mit.edu pub/linux
sunsite.unc.edu pub/Linux
End of Linux-Hardware Digest
******************************
