ABit BH6 - max CPU speed?

xppro · Oct 18, 2003

What is the maximum speed of slot 1 CPU that the ABit BH6 motherboard will take?

I currently have a Celeron 600 installed in my BH6, overclocked to 900MHz, but I'd like to go for something faster if I could.

Thanks

rjan Langbakk · Oct 18, 2003

I skriblet xppro noe ala dette

What is the maximum speed of slot 1 CPU that the ABit BH6 motherboard will take?

I currently have a Celeron 600 installed in my BH6, overclocked to 900MHz, but I'd like to go for something faster if I could.

I don't think you'll be seeing any noticeable increase in performance even if you upgraded to a Slot-T and a Tualatin 1.2-1.4 Ghz Celeron (if that's even possible on the BH-6, I don't know).

I'd just stay with the Cel 600@900 (which is a good increase) if it's stable, and perhaps install more memory if you haven't maxed it out already.

Depending on what you use the box for, increasing memory will probably give you a better boost than upping the CPU speed (at least in this case).

If performance is of concern, perhaps a new disk controller (ATA-100 or S-ATA) and perhaps newer, faster disks will give you a boost too.

PRIVATE1964 · Oct 18, 2003

The fastest slot 1 made you can use is a 1Ghz P3, 100mhz bus or you can get a powerleap adapter that will let you use faster Tualatin's.

When I had my BH6 I used a P3, 100 fsb slot 1 for a while. Thats the fastest slot 1 cpu at a fsb of 100mhz. I then upgraded to a Powerleap PL-iP3/T 1.4 GHz Intel Celeron which I had overclocked to around
1.568 Mhz.

If your BH6 is a newer revision then it might have a 1/4 divider for the pci bus. Then you might be able to use 133fsb cpu's but your agp slot will run out of spec at 89Mhz I believe. There are also no slot 1 cpu's at 133mhs fsb so you would need to use a powerleap or a slotket.

tf · Oct 18, 2003

The Slot-T is the cheap alternative to a Powerleap. A Tualatin Cel. 1.4 is the fastest cpu for the Slot-T.

"PRIVATE1964" wrote:

The fastest slot 1 made you can use is a 1Ghz P3, 100mhz bus or you can get a powerleap adapter that will let you use faster Tualatin's.

When I had my BH6 I used a P3, 100 fsb slot 1 for a while. Thats the fastest slot 1 cpu at a fsb of 100mhz. I then upgraded to a Powerleap PL-iP3/T 1.4

GHz

Intel Celeron which I had overclocked to around
1.568 Mhz.

If your BH6 is a newer revision then it might have a 1/4 divider for the pci bus. Then you might be able to use 133fsb cpu's but your agp slot will run out of spec at 89Mhz I believe. There are also no slot 1 cpu's at 133mhs fsb so you would need to use a powerleap or a slotket.

D & B · Oct 19, 2003

"There are also no slot 1 cpu's at 133mhs fsb so you
would need to use a powerleap or a slotket."

There are lots of Slot 1 133fsb cpu's...

"PRIVATE1964" wrote:

The fastest slot 1 made you can use is a 1Ghz P3, 100mhz bus or you can get a powerleap adapter that will let you use faster Tualatin's.

When I had my BH6 I used a P3, 100 fsb slot 1 for a while. Thats the fastest slot 1 cpu at a fsb of 100mhz. I then upgraded to a Powerleap PL-iP3/T 1.4

GHz

Intel Celeron which I had overclocked to around
1.568 Mhz.

If your BH6 is a newer revision then it might have a 1/4 divider for the pci bus. Then you might be able to use 133fsb cpu's but your agp slot will run out of spec at 89Mhz I believe. There are also no slot 1 cpu's at 133mhs fsb so you would need to use a powerleap or a slotket.

Spajky · Oct 19, 2003

On Sun, 19 Oct 2003 03:07:27 GMT, "TF"
wrote:

The Slot-T is the cheap alternative to a Powerleap. A Tualatin Cel. 1.4 is the fastest cpu for the Slot-T.

even better 1.1A OC to 133fsb ...

taking care of additional cooling the mosfet voltage regulators too !!

If your BH6 is a newer revision then it might have a 1/4 divider for the pci bus. Then you might be able to use 133fsb cpu's but your agp slot will run out of spec at 89Mhz I believe.

if having a nVidia card, there is a fix on my site ...

-- Regards, SPAJKY
& visit site - http://www.spajky.vze.com
Celly-III OC-ed,"Tualatin on BX-Slot1-MoBo!"
E-mail AntiSpam: remove ##

xppro · Oct 19, 2003

On Sun, 19 Oct 2003 02:01:05 +0200, "ï¿½rjan Langbakk"
wrote:

<snip> Thanks for the info.

I'd just stay with the Cel 600@900 (which is a good increase) if it's stable, and perhaps install more memory if you haven't maxed it out already.

Funny you should say that, as that's partly the reason I posted the original message.

It's stable for all but anything 3D related to my AGP video card. In fact, I'll start another thread now to avoid confusion.

Thanks

tf · Oct 19, 2003

If you have v1.0x, you might have multiplier problems with your AGP if you run at 133 FSB.

"Spajky" <Spajky##@volja.net> wrote:

On Sun, 19 Oct 2003 03:07:27 GMT, "TF"
wrote:

The Slot-T is the cheap alternative to a Powerleap. A Tualatin Cel. 1.4 is the fastest cpu for the Slot-T.

even better 1.1A OC to 133fsb ...

taking care of additional cooling the mosfet voltage regulators too !!

If your BH6 is a newer revision then it might have a 1/4 divider for the pci
bus. Then you might be able to use 133fsb cpu's but your agp slot will run out
of spec at 89Mhz I believe.

if having a nVidia card, there is a fix on my site ...

-- Regards, SPAJKY
& visit site - http://www.spajky.vze.com
Celly-III OC-ed,"Tualatin on BX-Slot1-MoBo!"
E-mail AntiSpam: remove ##

PRIVATE1964 · Oct 19, 2003

"There are also no slot 1 cpu's at 133mhs fsb so you would need to use a powerleap or a slotket."

That's correct, the fastest slot 1 is a P3, 1Ghz at 100fsb. It would be a big improvement over what he's using now, but a Powerleap at slightly over $100 would give him the best performance with a 1.4 Celeron Tulatin. There might be other alternatives like mentioned that are cheaper, but the fastest 100 Mhz cpu is the Tualatin. The Tualatin 1.4 which I had running at 1.568 was only a little bit faster then the P3 1Ghz I had running at 1.12 Ghz. So it all comes down to cost. I'm also not sure if you can still find the slot 1 100fsb version of the P3.

D & B · Oct 19, 2003

There are 1Ghz slot 1 133Mhz chips...which would be the fastest slot 1. http://cgi.ebay.ca/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=3436492742&category=14292

Why someone would invest any money on a system based on a aging BX board I will not understand. Sdram, UDMA-33, AGP-2X...a Duron or Athlon chip and motherboard would be the better option with more up to date north/south bridge technology.

"PRIVATE1964" wrote:

"There are also no slot 1 cpu's at 133mhs fsb so you
would need to use a powerleap or a slotket."

That's correct, the fastest slot 1 is a P3, 1Ghz at 100fsb. It would be a big improvement over what he's using now, but a Powerleap at slightly over $100 would give him the best performance with a 1.4 Celeron Tulatin. There might be other alternatives like mentioned that are cheaper, but the fastest 100 Mhz cpu is the Tualatin. The Tualatin 1.4 which I had running at 1.568 was only a little bit faster then the P3 1Ghz I had running at 1.12 Ghz. So it all comes down to cost. I'm also not sure if you can still find the slot 1 100fsb version of the P3.

rjan Langbakk · Oct 19, 2003

I
skriblet D & B noe ala dette

Why someone would invest any money on a system based on a aging BX board I will not understand.

Perhaps some of us appreciate stability over pure speed? The BX-chipset was one of the (if not _the_ one) longest lasting chipset(s) that was ever made - therefore reaching a level of stability that's still hard to beat.

Sdram, UDMA-33, AGP-2X...a Duron or Athlon chip and motherboard would be the better option with more up to date north/south bridge technology.

Which often doesn't work without extensive driver installation etc. I prefer my fileserver to be stable - I don't need that much speed from it anyway - and I don't want to spend several hundred dollars on new parts when the old works just fine.

In my case it wouldn't be cost effective to upgrade MB / CPU / RAM / AGP unless I also upgrade harddrives - which would set me back a lot more than an upgrade of the CPU and perhaps a little more RAM.

Regards
ï¿½NL

PRIVATE1964 · Oct 19, 2003

OK I stand corrected, but he most likely can't use that 133mhz fsb version so the fastest 100fsb is 1ghz at 100fsb.

PRIVATE1964 · Oct 19, 2003

I can understand why he would upgrade it. If he's not into games then why go with building a whole new systems.

PRIVATE1964 · Oct 19, 2003

Perhaps some of us appreciate stability over pure speed? The BX-chipset was one of the (if not _the_ one) longest lasting chipset(s) that was ever made - therefore reaching a level of stability that's still hard to beat.

Which I fully understand. If your not power hungry why go buy a whole new system. My BH6 lived a long life, until I needed to build a new system and only because I do play a lot of the new games. If a person doesn't need that speed then a BH6 is fine.

tf · Oct 21, 2003

If I were to upgrade from my BH-6, I'd want or need new cpu, RAM, video card, + P/S. That adds up to a lot more than just a slot-T + new cpu. A Cel 1.3 or 1.4 is only $45. Plus, the labor to pop one in is quick and easy.

I figure that the BH-6 is the B-52 of motherboards.

Why is someone who isn't interested in the BH-6 even looking at this thread?

"ï¿½rjan Langbakk" wrote:

I
skriblet D & B noe ala dette

Why someone would invest any money on a system based on a aging BX
board I will not understand.

Perhaps some of us appreciate stability over pure speed? The BX-chipset was one of the (if not _the_ one) longest lasting chipset(s) that was ever made - therefore reaching a level of stability that's still hard to beat.

Sdram, UDMA-33, AGP-2X...a Duron or Athlon chip and motherboard would
be the better option with more up to date north/south bridge ...

D & B · Oct 21, 2003

Not interested in the BH6? Just because I am being realistic. Upgrade options and cost vs. performance increases doesn't mean I am not interested in my BH6. This is a newsgroup, people post for help/opinions. I was trying to point out the other bottlenecks the system will still have. Accept the board for what it is, a great board for its time. Will upgrading the CPU keep you happy long enough to justify the cost or will you have to change something else in a couple months? If so wouldn't it be just to change to something more up to date? Read back to the first reply to the original post, someone else looks beyond the "MHz Myth" and tries to address the sub-system shortcomings.

"tf" wrote:

If I were to upgrade from my BH-6, I'd want or need new cpu, RAM, video card, + P/S. That adds up to a lot more than just a slot-T + new cpu. A Cel 1.3 or 1.4 is only $45. Plus, the labor to pop one in is quick and easy.

I figure that the BH-6 is the B-52 of motherboards.

Why is someone who isn't interested in the BH-6 even looking at this

thread?

"ï¿½rjan Langbakk" wrote:

I
skriblet D & B noe ala dette

Why someone would invest any money on a system based on a aging BX board I will not understand.

Perhaps some of us appreciate stability over pure speed? The BX-chipset was one of the (if not _the_ one) longest lasting chipset(s) that was ever made - therefore reaching a level of stability that's still hard to

beat.

Sdram, UDMA-33, AGP-2X...a Duron or Athlon chip and motherboard would be the better option with more up to date north/south bridge
technology.

Which often doesn't work without extensive driver installation etc. I prefer my fileserver to be stable - I don't need that much speed from it anyway - and I don't want to spend several hundred dollars on new parts when the old works just fine.

In my case it wouldn't be cost effective to upgrade MB / CPU / RAM / AGP unless I also upgrade harddrives - which would set me back a lot more than an upgrade of the CPU and perhaps a little more RAM.

Regards
ï¿½NL

GinTonix · Oct 21, 2003

"D & B" kirjoitti viestissï¿½

There are 1Ghz slot 1 133Mhz chips...which would be the fastest slot 1.

http://cgi.ebay.ca/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=3436492742&category=14292

Why someone would invest any money on a system based on a aging BX board I will not understand. Sdram, UDMA-33, AGP-2X...a Duron or Athlon chip and motherboard would be the better option with more up to date north/south bridge technology.

So what's wrong with those specifications (see some of my other posts)? :-o For me, it is just a hobby, don't know about the others. I love to see what can be done with old and outdated hardware and how much one can squeeze out of it. If the magical blue smoke sometimes escapes the cost is not too high. That's what happened to a HD some time ago, luckily it was just a 3 gig one. I would have cried aloud if it was a brand new 120 gig one... Well, actually no damage was done, I ripped the circuit board of a sectorally challenged HD and swapped the parts. The disc is OK now again. You learn a lot by fiddling with those scrap pile findings. The things learned can be very useful when moving on to newer (and above all - more expensive) hardware.

"PRIVATE1964" wrote:

"There are also no slot 1 cpu's at 133mhs fsb so you
would need to use a powerleap or a slotket."

IIRC there WERE some Slot1 1,13GHz P3's but they were pulled back. Too hot and not stable enough. Default core voltage was something like 1,85. Some of them survived and they are somewhere in use, I guess. Or maybe they are burned to a crisp by now.

That's correct, the fastest slot 1 is a P3, 1Ghz at 100fsb. It would be a big
improvement over what he's using now, but a Powerleap at slightly over $100
would give him the best performance with a 1.4 Celeron Tulatin. There might be
other alternatives like mentioned that are cheaper, but the fastest 100 Mhz cpu
is the Tualatin. The Tualatin 1.4 which I had running at 1.568 was only a little bit faster then the P3 1Ghz I had running at 1.12 Ghz. So it all comes
down to cost. I'm also not sure if you can still find the slot 1 100fsb version
of the P3.

D & B · Oct 21, 2003

Not interested in the BH6? Just because I am being realistic. Upgrade options and cost vs. performance increases doesn't mean I am not interested in my BH6. This is a newsgroup, people post for help/opinions. I was trying to point out the other bottlenecks the system will still have. Accept the board for what it is, a great board for its time. Will upgrading the CPU keep you happy long enough to justify the cost or will you have to change something else in a couple months? If so wouldn't it be just to change to something more up to date? Read back to the first reply to the original post, someone else looks beyond the "MHz Myth" and tries to address the sub-system shortcomings.

"tf" wrote:

If I were to upgrade from my BH-6, I'd want or need new cpu, RAM, video card, + P/S. That adds up to a lot more than just a slot-T + new cpu. A Cel 1.3 or 1.4 is only $45. Plus, the labor to pop one in is quick and easy.

I figure that the BH-6 is the B-52 of motherboards.

Why is someone who isn't interested in the BH-6 even looking at this

thread?

"ï¿½rjan Langbakk" wrote:

I
skriblet D & B noe ala dette

Why someone would invest any money on a system based on a aging BX board I will not understand.

Perhaps some of us appreciate stability over pure speed? The BX-chipset was one of the (if not _the_ one) longest lasting chipset(s) that was ever made - therefore reaching a level of stability that's still hard to

beat.

Sdram, UDMA-33, AGP-2X...a Duron or Athlon chip and motherboard would be the better option with more up to date north/south bridge
technology.

Which often doesn't work without extensive driver installation etc. I prefer my fileserver to be stable - I don't need that much speed from it anyway - and I don't want to spend several hundred dollars on new parts when the old works just fine.

In my case it wouldn't be cost effective to upgrade MB / CPU / RAM / AGP unless I also upgrade harddrives - which would set me back a lot more than an upgrade of the CPU and perhaps a little more RAM.

Regards
ï¿½NL