• Some users have recently had their accounts hijacked. It seems that the now defunct EVGA forums might have compromised your password there and seems many are using the same PW here. We would suggest you UPDATE YOUR PASSWORD and TURN ON 2FA for your account here to further secure it. None of the compromised accounts had 2FA turned on.
    Once you have enabled 2FA, your account will be updated soon to show a badge, letting other members know that you use 2FA to protect your account. This should be beneficial for everyone that uses FSFT.

AMD guy needs help with Intel stuff

D

Drucifer

Gawd
Joined
Feb 16, 2005
Messages
671
Okay all, first off, I have always been an AMD guy, but I am playing with Intel for the first time since the P100s came out. Yeah, its been awhile. :)

I have a proc that I have no bloody clue about. I know it works, 'cause it POST'ed in the POS OEM Dell board it came out of. That board had SDRAM, and sucked.

What I need to know, is there a board that will support this chip, that will run DDR400 (or better :) ) in dual channel mode? Additionally, any information you guys can provide on this proc would be most appreciated.

I have Googled, and mostly found reviews of the proc when it first was released...not exactly helpful. So, I am asking here.

Here are the specs on the proc:

Intel Pentium 4
1.5GHz/256/400/1.75v
SL59V COSTA RICA
3140A003-0429

Thanks in advance.

***EDIT***

The proc is a 478 pin proc... at least, that is the board it came out of. Also, pretty sure what I have researched indicates that as well.
 
no i dont think you will ba able to run that chip @ DDR400 with anyboard with out some major OCing
 
Okay... I am not afraid of OC'ing this thing... its better than the POS TBird 1333 currently in my machine that will run, barely, at 266FSB.

DDR400 out of the question? Is that a chipset support limitation, or does the proc not run at 400FSB?

I was asking about the RAM, because I have 1Gb (2x512MB) of PC3200 (DDR400) arriving tomorrow, and if I can find a board this proc will work in, I would love to get it operational.
 
Are you sure it's a 478 socket, and not a 423?
It sounds like a Willamette processor (1.5 GHz, 256k cache, 400 MHz FSB), and afaik those have only been available in 423. The SDRAM-board is also a hint that it's probably a Willamette... Those used either SDRAM or Rambus in the early days... Afaik Northwood always used DDR.
Other than that I think the DDR400 boards are all dual channel and only support Northwood or Prescott.
Not that it matters that much, this CPU is so slow that you don't really need DDR400, let alone dual channel.
 
Scali said:
Are you sure it's a 478 socket, and not a 423?
It sounds like a Willamette processor (1.5 GHz, 256k cache, 400 MHz FSB), and afaik those have only been available in 423. The SDRAM-board is also a hint that it's probably a Willamette... Those used either SDRAM or Rambus in the early days... Afaik Northwood always used DDR.
Other than that I think the DDR400 boards are all dual channel and only support Northwood or Prescott.
Not that it matters that much, this CPU is so slow that you don't really need DDR400, let alone dual channel.
Click to expand...

Unfortunately, Intel made S478 willamettes.

And yes, it would be a massive overclock to hit DDR400. It's FSB is 100MHz quad pumped. You would have to get it to 200MHz quade pumped, a 1.5ghz overclock. Good luck, dude :D

Also, I have Northwoods that used RDRAM. A 1.7ghz one and a 2.4. Both were 100mhz quad pumped with RDRAM.
 
robberbaron said:
Unfortunately, Intel made S478 willamettes.
Click to expand...

Yes, you're right, I found some info on those after googling around.
But I also found that not all S478 boards support Willamette (at least, not officially, it may work anyway, who knows).

And yes, it would be a massive overclock to hit DDR400. It's FSB is 100MHz quad pumped. You would have to get it to 200MHz quade pumped, a 1.5ghz overclock. Good luck, dude :D
Click to expand...

In theory the 400 MHz FSB would be fine for DDR400. However, as I said, in practice, I think only the dual channel boards support DDR400. In that case you indeed need an 800 MHz FSB.
But, from what I could tell, all 845 chipsets still support the Willamette... This would mean that you could take an 845PE, which supports DDR333 by default.
Then you could overclock the FSB to about 480 MHz, and you'd hit DDR400 speeds for the memory. This would mean you have to run the CPU at about 1.8 GHz, which should actually be quite possible, with a decent all-copper heatsink.

Also, I have Northwoods that used RDRAM. A 1.7ghz one and a 2.4. Both were 100mhz quad pumped with RDRAM.
Click to expand...

Yes I know, even the famous PC1066 RDRAM, which only worked on Northwoods ofcourse, because of the 533 MHz FSB.
But I don't think I've ever seen a Northwood system that used SDRAM... Then again, I may be in denial :p
 
Excellent info guys, and I thank you!


I'll probably play with the proc this evening, after I pick up a board for it, and see what I can coerce out of it.

Any recommendations for boards? i845 chipset, brand brands are fas as OC'ing options?
 
you know, that thunderbird would whoop up on that p4... weather its at 1.5ghz, or 2.0ghz...

dont bother with that willamette, it would cost more than its worth to get it running. those things ran hot, oc'ed horribly and were crappy performers.
 
lithium726 said:
you know, that thunderbird would whoop up on that p4... weather its at 1.5ghz, or 2.0ghz...

dont bother with that willamette, it would cost more than its worth to get it running. those things ran hot, oc'ed horribly and were crappy performers.
Click to expand...

Good to see that we still have AMD-biased people around.
You don't even know what he's going to use that Willamette for... Other than that, a Thunderbird is not that great either... Talk about running hot and oc'ing horribly... The Thunderbird basically invented the concept (been there done that, I'm a Tbird 1400 owner).
And a Tbird is horribly outdated... It only supports MMX and 3DNow!.
I've already had software that simply failed to run on CPUs without SSE (I upgraded to 1800+ for mainly that reason). The Willamette offers SSE2 aswell.
So when you use software that makes a lot of use of SSE/SSE2, like modern games or audio/video encoding... then the Tbird is basically nowhere, and the P4 would still work quite well.
 
yeah... but it sounds like he is doing this just becuase he has the chip, in which case its really not worth it

thunderbirds ran hot, yes, and it wasnt made any better by the fact that all we had back then were those shittly little aluminum POSs that couldnt dissapate heat worth a damn. with the same HSF, my thunderbird runs cooler than my barton and my thoroghbred, and my p4 (northwood, with the IHS removed) runs a bit hotter. of course, all of these have been overvolted... probably around 1.75v for all of them, higher on the tbird since that was the default for those damn chips, as well as for the willamette so i really cant see hte heat argument (between the two, as they both ran hot)in this case unless you are using a terrible cooler for one and a good one for the ohter, they are both .18 micron and have a core voltage of 1.75v

in addition to this, they both have 256k cache, which bottlenecks the p4 much more than it will bottleneck the thunderbird, and both will be poor overclockers. i845 doesnt support dual channel (AFAIK, feel free to correct me) which introduces more of a bottleneck, unless he wants to get an RD platform with some pc800 or pc1066 for the bandwidth that p4 needs.

at stock speeds, the tbird would WHOOP the willamette, there is only 170mhz between them and due to the architechtural differences the thunderbird would more than make up that difference with just hte way it processes data.

ill admit, i am a little biased toward AMD; however, i use intel's chips just as much as i use AMD's, and i happen to think that ATM (gotta wait to see how turion is gonna do) intel is raping AMD in the mobile front, even back to the p3 days, as my p3-m machine kicks around an old athlon lappy i had (1ghz vs. 1.2ghz respectivly) in heat, speed, and responsivness. i cant wait for yonah, and i cant wait for intel to get rid of netburst, which is my biggest qualm with them right now.
 
The Tbird will be faster than a 1.5GHz P4, assuming it is a Willamette.
 
I am going to use this chip as the new main box in my house, until I upgrade to 64bit. The problem I have, is that my TBird is currently running on an ECS board (K7S5A Pro), and has NO OC options. Nothing. So the proc runs at 1333, on the SiS chipset. Slower than sin.

I got the P4 for free, and just want to be able to replace the TBird with something that would OC, even a little, because, at that point, it would at least be quicker than what I have now.

Additionally, if I can't use Dual Channel w/ this proc, that's okay. I bought the RAM for the 64bit upgrade, so I can deal for now. The RAM is PC3200, and, even putting it in my TBird system, I still will not see any kind of increase, except from going to 1GB from 256MB.

If the P4 will allow me to use a higher FSB than the TBird, coming closer to the capability of the RAM, then I am all for it. Plus, I won't be stuck on a ECS board with absolutely 0 OC options.

Not to mention the fact that if this chip actually supports more than 3DNow and MMX, and is at least a little bit better suited for modern gaming, then how can I go wrong?
 
Josh_B said:
The Tbird will be faster than a 1.5GHz P4, assuming it is a Willamette.
Click to expand...

Actually it won't be.
An AthlonXP 1500+ happens to be 1.33 GHz, like this Thunderbird. But the Thunderbird is slightly slower than an AthlonXP, because of some architectural improvements in the latter (like hardware prefetch and the added SSE).
And even then, as I already mentioned before, the P4 still has SSE2 as its secret weapon.
So you can expect the P4 to perform at least equal to the Athlon, and (much) better when SSE or SSE2 are involved.
And then the Intel 845 chipset will probably add some more performance over the old SiS chipset that the Athlon is using, partly because of a faster memory bus, and partly because Intel chipsets are just way more efficient than rubbish from SiS, VIA etc.
 
Thanks Scali, for understanding the situation. :)


Are there any recommendations for boards that offer OC options running that chipset?
 
Brands like MSI, Gigabyte, Asus should be pretty stable and offer decent overclocking potential.
My brother runs a 2.4 GHz Northwood with 533 MHz FSB on an MSI 845E Max (supports DDR266). He's got it clocked to 2.9 GHz (640 MHz FSB), with DDR400 memory in it, using only the all-aluminium stock Intel cooler and two case fans, and the fans in the PSU ofcourse.
So that works quite well, I'd say. An 845PE would be even better, since that supports DDR333 too.
 
Scali said:
And then the Intel 845 chipset will probably add some more performance over the old SiS chipset that the Athlon is using, partly because of a faster memory bus, and partly because Intel chipsets are just way more efficient than rubbish from SiS, VIA etc.
Click to expand...
now that i cant disagree with

however, if he got an nforce2 board, i am positive the tbird would pull ahead.

for a new board for either platform, look into asus or abit, they are my personal favorites and have never done me wrong :)
MSI is ok too, but i prefer asus and abit to them.
 
lithium726 said:
however, if he got an nforce2 board, i am positive the tbird would pull ahead.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't be too sure about that.
Don't mistake a Thunderbird for an AthlonXP, there's quite a difference between the two, especially the later XPs. Just because those are faster than a Willamette doesn't mean a Thunderbird will be faster aswell. Besides, I still think the Willamette would offer more OCing potential... and is more future-proof, because of SSE/SSE2 as mentioned before.
I also think that an i845 motherboard would be cheaper than an nForce2 board today.
 
With Celeron D's and Semptron's so cheap these days, you would be better off buying a system based on either of these than using a willamette.

Don't believe me?

Your Tbird is faster than a 1700mhz willamette with Dual Channel Rdram (DCRdram is faster than single channel DDR) much less a 1500mhz willamette with SCDDR.
http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/pentium4-1700.html

willamettes really suck.

==>Lazn
 
get a 865PE mobo, AFAIK it will support it no problem as long as it is S478. I suggest the abit IS7-E2 because its working for me flawlessly.
 
Peach said:
get a 865PE mobo, AFAIK it will support it no problem as long as it is S478. I suggest the abit IS7-E2 because its working for me flawlessly.
Click to expand...
wrong. 865/875 does not support willamette becuase of hte voltage signaling it needs.
 
Scali said:
I wouldn't be too sure about that.
Don't mistake a Thunderbird for an AthlonXP, there's quite a difference between the two, especially the later XPs. Just because those are faster than a Willamette doesn't mean a Thunderbird will be faster aswell. Besides, I still think the Willamette would offer more OCing potential... and is more future-proof, because of SSE/SSE2 as mentioned before.
I also think that an i845 motherboard would be cheaper than an nForce2 board today.
Click to expand...
dude, athlon XP was just thunderbird with a new ops(remember, later tbirds had the double pumped 266mhz bus, and its not like were talking about hte orig K7 here or anyhing), its nothing special. i know that later xps are better htan tbird too, but i know that tbird can win out against a willy, as lazn has also pointed out.

dont be so sure about that 845, you have to deal with ebay to get one. nf2 boards are cheap now, like 40 bucks cheap
 
lithium726 said:
wrong. 865/875 does not support willamette becuase of hte voltage signaling it needs.
Click to expand...


Thats odd, i never seen anything saying, that a willemette won't work, they should put that on the box or something if it doesnt support it.
 
Okay, so, 865 chipset will NOT work, and the 845, as long as it is the PE version, will. Right?

Are there any other versions that are good ones to have/ ones to stay away from, etc?

PROCESSOR INFORMATION FROM INTEL SITE:

[font=Arial, Helvetica, Sans-Serif]Intel® Pentium® 4 processors Return to list [/font]​


[font=Arial, Helvetica, Sans-Serif]Results

[/font][font=Arial, Helvetica, Sans-Serif]sSpec Number [/font][font=Arial, Helvetica, Sans-Serif]SL59V[/font] [font=Arial, Helvetica, Sans-Serif]Processor Frequency [/font][font=Arial, Helvetica, Sans-Serif]1.50 GHz[/font] [font=Arial, Helvetica, Sans-Serif]CPUID String

[/font][font=Arial, Helvetica, Sans-Serif]0F0Ah[/font] [font=Arial, Helvetica, Sans-Serif]Package Type [/font][font=Arial, Helvetica, Sans-Serif]FC-PGA2 478-pin[/font] [font=Arial, Helvetica, Sans-Serif]Core Voltage [/font][font=Arial, Helvetica, Sans-Serif]1.75V[/font] [font=Arial, Helvetica, Sans-Serif]Bus Speed

[/font][font=Arial, Helvetica, Sans-Serif]400 MHz[/font] [font=Arial, Helvetica, Sans-Serif]Thermal Guideline [/font][font=Arial, Helvetica, Sans-Serif]57.9W[/font] [font=Arial, Helvetica, Sans-Serif]Core Stepping [/font][font=Arial, Helvetica, Sans-Serif]C1[/font] [font=Arial, Helvetica, Sans-Serif]Thermal Spec

[/font][font=Arial, Helvetica, Sans-Serif]73°C[/font] [font=Arial, Helvetica, Sans-Serif]L2 Cache Size [/font][font=Arial, Helvetica, Sans-Serif]256 KB[/font] [font=Arial, Helvetica, Sans-Serif]Manufacturing Technology [/font][font=Arial, Helvetica, Sans-Serif]0.18 micron[/font] [font=Arial, Helvetica, Sans-Serif]L2 Cache Speed [/font][font=Arial, Helvetica, Sans-Serif]1.50 GHz[/font] [font=Arial, Helvetica, Sans-Serif]Bus/Core Ratio [/font][font=Arial, Helvetica, Sans-Serif]15.0[/font] [font=Arial, Helvetica, Sans-Serif]Spec Update

[/font][font=Arial, Helvetica, Sans-Serif]http://developer.intel.com/design/Pentium4/documentation.htm[/font] [font=Arial, Helvetica, Sans-Serif]Product Order Codes

[/font][font=Arial, Helvetica, Sans-Serif]


[/font]
 
anything 845 or earlier will work, just watch out for RDRAM boards, cause rdram is really expensve (i just sold a gig of pc800 on ebay for like 300 bucks)

i think theyre telling you to get PE just cuase its the latest one that will support your chip... but honestly, youd be better off getting a really cheap NW p4 on the forums or even a mobile p4-m (really cheap on ebay, like 30 bucks, and oc like mad) with an 865pe board, as it supports dual channel DDR400, and a mobile can easily hit 200fsb (all mobiles default to 12x, so itd be 2.4ghz at 200fsb) as their core default volts are 1.3, and the desktop boards run them at 1.55

if you really wanna get that willy running though, get hte 845
 
lithium726 said:
dude, athlon XP was just thunderbird with a new ops(remember, later tbirds had the double pumped 266mhz bus, and its not like were talking about hte orig K7 here or anyhing), its nothing special. i know that later xps are better htan tbird too, but i know that tbird can win out against a willy, as lazn has also pointed out.
Click to expand...

'Dude', you don't have to tell me the difference between a Thunderbird and a Palomino. As I say, I've had a 1400 and upgraded to an 1800+.
Don't look at all those outdated benchmarks, we're talking about now, when SSE code is common, and applications assume high bandwidth. It's a different story now.
Look at these benchmarks for example: http://www.tomshardware.com/cpu/20041221/cpu_charts-13.html

They show that in most applications the 1500+ is faster than the Tbird 1400, despite the clockspeed disadvantage (both on SDR platform)... and they also show that the Willamettes still do quite well (with RDRAM, although on a 1.5 GHz it should not be too much slower with DDR400).
Note also that the Thunderbird already fails to run 3DMark05 completely, because it lacks SSE!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top