has anyone tried to put C3 CPU on BP6?

Batch codes, RAM specs, BIOS settings, etc..
Post Reply
KliK
Posts: 350
Joined: Fri Mar 11, 2005 3:56 pm
Location: Zagreb, Croatia
Contact:

has anyone tried to put C3 CPU on BP6?

Post by KliK »

i don't know what kind of pin assembly is present at CPGA S370 C3....maybe they would work without modification on motherboard! :)

and with only a new BIOS, they would run more than Medocinno Celerons... :D
KliK
Posts: 350
Joined: Fri Mar 11, 2005 3:56 pm
Location: Zagreb, Croatia
Contact:

Post by KliK »

note that C3 Smauel2 proc:

- works on 1,6/1,65V;
- has buss speed of 100/133 (can work on 66 also, but don't forget that BP6 works as high as 112MHz bus speed);
- it is available up to 800MHz core speed (best would be 800/100);
- it has 192KB L2 cache compared to 128KB L2 on Celerons;
- has lower heat dicipation, so it means low COOLING (if any is necesary);
- has MMX & 3Dnow! techonlogy in it!
- it's CPGA is compatibile with SPGA & PPGA packages;
KliK
Posts: 350
Joined: Fri Mar 11, 2005 3:56 pm
Location: Zagreb, Croatia
Contact:

Post by KliK »

file for comparisson...can anyone check the PINs on page 44 of this file?
Billl
Posts: 211
Joined: Fri Jul 25, 2003 1:52 pm
Location: USA

Post by Billl »

I can't figure out why you would want to? Have you ever used a Via chip? I have their 1.2 Gig performance (actual speed 800Mhz) processor. The thing is a dog! My Cellery 366 OC'ed to 550 runs rings around it! It literally does a S.E.T.I. work unit in half the time as the C4. And forget over clocking it. It runs hotter then hell at default speed. Mine is integrated into the Mother Board I bought. That may have something to do with the heat factor. But the performance is still dreadful.

Billl
Wolfram
Posts: 401
Joined: Tue Jul 30, 2002 3:19 am
Location: Germany

Post by Wolfram »

I agree on the bad performance of the C3. But they are interesting because they need much less power than dual Celerons. Passive cooling shouldn't be an issue.

BUT the newer C3 chips need Tualatin-compatible boards. So I guess they would not work on the BP6.
BP6, RU BIOS, XP SP3, ACPI, 2x366@523(1,95V), Pentalpha HS + 1x 12cm fan @5V, 768MB, Powercolor Geforce 3, RTL8139D NIC, Terratec EWS64L, Samsung M40 80GB (2,5''), LiteOn CDRW
Billl
Posts: 211
Joined: Fri Jul 25, 2003 1:52 pm
Location: USA

Post by Billl »

Wolfram wrote:I agree on the bad performance of the C3. But they are interesting because they need much less power than dual Celerons. Passive cooling shouldn't be an issue.

BUT the newer C3 chips need Tualatin-compatible boards. So I guess they would not work on the BP6.
I still fail to see the point? Want to use less power? Build a 486! :bigroll:



Billl
Wolfram
Posts: 401
Joined: Tue Jul 30, 2002 3:19 am
Location: Germany

Post by Wolfram »

Billl wrote:
Wolfram wrote:I agree on the bad performance of the C3. But they are interesting because they need much less power than dual Celerons. Passive cooling shouldn't be an issue.

BUT the newer C3 chips need Tualatin-compatible boards. So I guess they would not work on the BP6.
I still fail to see the point? Want to use less power? Build a 486! :bigroll:



Billl
You are right. I guess it's the EPIA platform that attracts most C3 users. Small form factor, current hardware with video acceleration etc.

There must be a reason why there are almost no larger boards for C3 CPUs around. Personally, I used an old socket 370 board and a Celeron 566 (12W max.) for a silent/low-power system. It's only micro-ATX and of course not as, erm, stylish as an EPIA machine. Guess those are more for the "pimp-my-PC"-type of users.
BP6, RU BIOS, XP SP3, ACPI, 2x366@523(1,95V), Pentalpha HS + 1x 12cm fan @5V, 768MB, Powercolor Geforce 3, RTL8139D NIC, Terratec EWS64L, Samsung M40 80GB (2,5''), LiteOn CDRW
Post Reply