I have got the computer with the Via Apollo Pro 133 chipset. My CPU is
Pentium III 1000@1050 Mhz. My motherboard is Shuttle AV11. I have got 384 Mb
of PC133@140 SDRAM Memory. My graphics card is Geforce 3 Ti 200. I installed
4-way Memory Interleave Enabler. Is my computer much slower than similar
configuration on BX chipset? In Sisoft Sandra 2003 memory benchmark shows
about 1000 Mb/s (fpu and alu tests). Everest shows the read from memory
about 1070 Mb/s and write about 200 Mb/s. I have got the short memory access
time in Everest (103.1 ns). This is similar to DDR memory. If I insert the
memory chip to the first socket in the motherboard the PC133 Memory have got
the erros eg. Stop errors in Windows XP. What way can I also tweak my
computer? Is 7000 3DMark good result on my configuration?
On Sat, 12 May 2007 20:40:45 +0200, "Konrado5"
<jnmpacnn5@hmsdpha.ok> wrote:
>I have got the computer with the Via Apollo Pro 133 chipset. My CPU is
>Pentium III 1000@1050 Mhz. My motherboard is Shuttle AV11. I have got 384 Mb
>of PC133@140 SDRAM Memory. My graphics card is Geforce 3 Ti 200. I installed
>4-way Memory Interleave Enabler. Is my computer much slower than similar
>configuration on BX chipset?
On some tasks it may be a little slower due to lower memory
throughput, but IIRC it supports ATA66 instead of only ATA33
on BX, so it might regain some performance when used more
recent hard drives which can easily exceed ~33MB/s.
>In Sisoft Sandra 2003 memory benchmark shows
>about 1000 Mb/s (fpu and alu tests). Everest shows the read from memory
>about 1070 Mb/s and write about 200 Mb/s. I have got the short memory access
>time in Everest (103.1 ns). This is similar to DDR memory. If I insert the
>memory chip to the first socket in the motherboard the PC133 Memory have got
>the erros eg. Stop errors in Windows XP.
You should test any memory configuration by running
Memtest86+ for a few hours before booting the operating
system.
>What way can I also tweak my
>computer? Is 7000 3DMark good result on my configuration?
Depends on which version of 3Dmark. For 3Dmark2001, it is
fairly good, mostly determined by the video card but you
might get 1000 or so points higher if it were running on a
later era AGP platform.
How much work is it worth to tweak such an old system? If
performance matters a lot it may be time to replace it.
On May 12, 11:40 am, "Konrado5" <jnmpac...@hmsdpha.ok> wrote:
> I have got the computer with the Via Apollo Pro 133 chipset. My CPU is
> Pentium III 1000@1050 Mhz. My motherboard is Shuttle AV11. I have got 384 Mb
> of PC133@140 SDRAM Memory. My graphics card is Geforce 3 Ti 200. I installed
> 4-way Memory Interleave Enabler. Is my computer much slower than similar
> configuration on BX chipset? In Sisoft Sandra 2003 memory benchmark shows
> about 1000 Mb/s (fpu and alu tests). Everest shows the read from memory
> about 1070 Mb/s and write about 200 Mb/s. I have got the short memory access
> time in Everest (103.1 ns). This is similar to DDR memory. If I insert the
> memory chip to the first socket in the motherboard the PC133 Memory have got
> the erros eg. Stop errors in Windows XP. What way can I also tweak my
> computer? Is 7000 3DMark good result on my configuration?
I'd be worried more about stability than performance. Quit worring
about benchmarks. The only question is does this computer do what you
ask of it?
It's a p3, you won't run the latest games. But games that come out at
around the time the motherboard was manufactured should be OK. It'll
browse the internet, and do word processing as good as any other
computer.
I think you would do well to undo your overclocking, given the
stability problems with the first ram slot. It's an aging system, but
if you keep it running in spec, it'll do for years to come. I can
guarantee you won't notice the difference between 1000mhz and 1050mhz.
Uzytkownik "kony" <spam@spam.com> napisal w wiadomosci
news:delc435v35js19vnblukjtcv15dn5amfm3@4ax.com...
> > On some tasks it may be a little slower due to lower memory
> throughput, but IIRC it supports ATA66 instead of only ATA33
> on BX, so it might regain some performance when used more
> recent hard drives which can easily exceed ~33MB/s.
How much the memory througput is slower than BX? I have got about 1000 Mb/s
in Sisoft Sandra. Is it lower result than BX?
Uzytkownik <paulmd@efn.org> napisal w wiadomosci
news:1179032851.249717.275780@l77g2000hsb.googlegr oups.com...
> I think you would do well to undo your overclocking, given the
> stability problems with the first ram slot. It's an aging system, but
> if you keep it running in spec, it'll do for years to come. I can
> guarantee you won't notice the difference between 1000mhz and 1050mhz.
My computer is very stable but I don't think this is fast.
On Tue, 15 May 2007 13:24:17 +0200, "Konrado5"
<jnmpacnn5@hmsdpha.ok> wrote:
>Uzytkownik "kony" <spam@spam.com> napisal w wiadomosci
>news:delc435v35js19vnblukjtcv15dn5amfm3@4ax.com.. .
>> > On some tasks it may be a little slower due to lower memory
>> throughput, but IIRC it supports ATA66 instead of only ATA33
>> on BX, so it might regain some performance when used more
>> recent hard drives which can easily exceed ~33MB/s.
>How much the memory througput is slower than BX? I have got about 1000 Mb/s
>in Sisoft Sandra. Is it lower result than BX?
That's not memory throughput, it considers the CPU cache
too. I don't remember the exact numbers as it has been a
few years since I benchmarked Via 693 chipset boards. I
didn't even use many of them, jumping from 440LX to 440BX
and Via 694 instead of 693.
On average, your system will be slower at memory intensive
tasks and faster at those bottlenecked by hard drive (using
newer hard drives). It isn't important to know the exact %,
not when anything else made in the past several years is far
faster than either. If performance matters, it's time to
replace it.
On May 15, 4:25 am, "Konrado5" <jnmpac...@hmsdpha.ok> wrote:
> Uzytkownik <pau...@efn.org> napisal w wiadomoscinews:1179032851.249717.275780@l77g2000hs b.googlegroups.com...> I think you would do well to undo your overclocking, given the
> > stability problems with the first ram slot. It's an aging system, but
> > if you keep it running in spec, it'll do for years to come. I can
> > guarantee you won't notice the difference between 1000mhz and 1050mhz.
>
> My computer is very stable but I don't think this is fast.
Compared with the latest, no, It's not fast. It's part of the reason I
suggested undoing the overclocking. You're gaining only 5%, that way.
It would be more effective, if you want to boost performance (and not
just get a new computer), if you were to take a look at the programs
that would be run all the time, such as the antivirus (which you need)
and various quickstarters, which you don't need.
"paulmd@efn.org" wrote:
> On May 15, 4:25 am, "Konrado5" <jnmpac...@hmsdpha.ok> wrote:
>
.... snip ...
>
>> My computer is very stable but I don't think this is fast.
>
> Compared with the latest, no, It's not fast. It's part of the
> reason I suggested undoing the overclocking. You're gaining only
> 5%, that way.
>
> It would be more effective, if you want to boost performance (and
> not just get a new computer), if you were to take a look at the
> programs that would be run all the time, such as the antivirus
> (which you need) and various quickstarters, which you don't need.
You don't need any antivirus for Usenet if you keep html, java, and
javascript turned off, and don't gaily hit any presented links, or
if you use Linux. Using Netscape or Thunderbird makes this easy.
--
<http://www.cs.auckland.ac.nz/~pgut001/pubs/vista_cost.txt>
<http://www.securityfocus.com/columnists/423>
<http://www.aaxnet.com/editor/edit043.html>
<http://kadaitcha.cx/vista/dogsbreakfast/index.html>
cbfalconer at maineline dot net
Użytkownik "Spajky" <Spajky@##volja.net> napisał w wiadomości
news:edko43hthf8smipv03ts8j1lm7meicn91m@4ax.com...
> forget bandwith benchmarks like Sandra; check :
> http://193.189.160.28/jerman55/HP/benchMem.htm
I can't find this benchmark. Could you give me link to this file?
Via Apollo Pro 133 
Linear Mode
