Well, Asus does have a board for the Athlon but they hide behind
a tree when they advertise it :-)
Jeff,
Got to www.tomshardware.com to get an eye opener on the
Athlon boards. I suspect the support problem is very real
because of the fear of Intel cutting back the chip supply for
the big selling boards etc.
I recently choose to go with a SOYO -sy-6ba+lV (which is
an overclockers dream) coupled with a Plll 450 running
at 600+/- at default voltage.
Larry
-----Original Message-----
From: Tom Brinkman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Sunday, November 21, 1999 8:33 PM
Subject: Re: [newbie] Athlon & Linux
>On Sun, 21 Nov 1999, you wrote:
>> I'm going to build a new computer and wanted to know if there is any
problems
>> with the athlon cpu and linux. I'm going to be using an Athlon 550Mhz and
the
>> FIC SD11 motherboard with PC133 Ram. Any input would help. If I can't use
linux
>> with it, I'll go with another setup.
>>
>> Thanks a lot.
>> Jeff Filapose
>
> Hard for me to believe anybody's spending big $$'s for mhz just
>now. Between Intels' P3-600 disaster, they're scramblin' around to
>get a Cu proccessor/mobo market ready, and AMD's Athlon lack of, or
>'unwilling' mobo/chipset support, problems with even ram/PS's, why
>anybody'd want to jump into the fray .... beyond me (?)
>
> Unless you've got an application specific need for processor
>power and SMP doesn't fit the bill, the only reason I can think of
>to go for CPU mhz, 133 fsb, and such ...... is games under Windows.
>Certainly, I'd be cautious about trusting anything else to the
>current 'not ready for prime time' hardware.
>
> that off my chest, let's get down to opinion...
>
> There is no such thing as PC133 ram. There's 7, 7.5, and 8 ns
>dimms which will run flawlessly at 133 or (lot's) higher FSB's.
>The only way to rate it is to use it, IMNSHO. For over a year now,
>and before the gimmick of 'PC133' was advertised, clocker's have
>been runnin some ram 'rated' as PC66 ---- at 133 mhz! The label
>doesn't mean a thing. It's how fast you time it in bios that
>provides the memory speed. I'm runnin a stick of 13 mo. old 'pc100'
>at 2-2-2 (cas2 timings) 126mhz right now as I type. Before they
>hyped 'PC133, I ran it in a p2-467 at 133.6 mhz for almost a year.
>
> OK, down to facts. There's all kinds of problems with Athlon's
>and with iCuMine's, any OS. Not this boy, wouldn't touch one with a
>10' pole. When a quality manufacturer's like Asus won't even put
>they're name on it (you haven't seen an Aopen-Athlon bd. yet (?)
>either), and Intel's in there squashing they're own 8<whatever>
>chipset based boards 'cause they're (....own, Intel boards are
>defective -- ram wise) not ready for 'prime time', I say... stay
>away.
>
> Guess I'm just defending why I spent $186 to go from a p2-467
>to a p3-567 (one reason, a M$ flight sim that does use the Katmai
>instructions) recently. There's nothin on the market right now
>that deserves going to ... or is ready yet ....'specially in a U*ix
>environment that lags behind the leading edge hardware.
>
> to answer the original question...
>
> I do a lot of hardware reading and the worst Athlon board
>reportedly is the FIC SD11. Which doesn't surprise me 'cause they
>never made a good BX board either.
> --
>.. Tom Brinkman [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
>
>
