PCI slot next to AGP for P4 boards

[John Smith (archive)]

Does the PCI slot next to the AGP slot on the newer P4 motherboards with the Intel 865 or 875 chipsets (Springdale or Canterwood) still share an IRQ like on the older PIII mainboards (BX chipsets, etc) thus rendering it basically not useable?

Thanks, JS

 

[JAD]

actually its modern ASPI that helps make it more useful but as a rule I don't use it unless necessary.

"John Smith" wrote:

Does the PCI slot next to the AGP slot on the newer P4 motherboards with the Intel 865 or 875 chipsets (Springdale or Canterwood) still share an IRQ like on the older PIII mainboards (BX chipsets, etc) thus rendering it basically not useable?

Thanks, JS

 

[Martin Eriksson]

"JAD" wrote:

actually its modern ASPI that helps make it more useful but as a rule I

don't use it unless necessary.

Well, I'm sure you just made a typo, but it's probably ACPI you mean...

Also, APIC can help stuff too by providing up to 255 IRQ's.

(ACPI = Advanced Configuration and Power Interface)
(APIC = Advanced Programmable Interrupt Controller)

/M

 

[Joe (83)]

I think John Smith's original question was intended to be:

"Is the PCI slot next to the AGP slot still hardwired to share an Interrupt with the AGP slot on the new P4 Intel chipset motherboards?"

I'm not sure that APIC could resolve this issue if the new P4 boards are like the older P3 boards but I could be wrong.

Anyone else here using that adjacent PCI slot successfully with a card that requires a separate IRQ on a P4 system?

"Martin Eriksson" wrote:

"JAD" wrote:

actually its modern ASPI that helps make it more useful but as a rule I don't use it unless necessary.

Well, I'm sure you just made a typo, but it's probably ACPI you mean...

Also, APIC can help stuff too by providing up to 255 IRQ's.

(ACPI = Advanced Configuration and Power Interface)
(APIC = Advanced Programmable Interrupt Controller)

...

 

[jt]

I do believe you mean ACPI, not the old SCSI layer which is ASPI.

Normally should have no problem with the first slot anymore, as long as you are using a more modern OS.

JT

On Sat, 04 Oct 2003 20:41:44 GMT, "JAD" wrote:

actually its modern ASPI that helps make it more useful but as a rule I don't use it unless necessary.

"John Smith" wrote:
Does the PCI slot next to the AGP slot on the newer P4 motherboards with the
Intel 865 or 875 chipsets (Springdale or Canterwood) still share an IRQ like
on the older PIII mainboards (BX chipsets, etc) thus rendering it basically
not useable?

Thanks, JS

 

[JAD]

yes I typo'd
I have tried to use the #1 pci With a P4B266 asus board (not new /not old) with a sound card (CSBA2P resource hog) and it was a no go with an AGP ATI AIW vid card.

"Martin Eriksson" wrote:

"JAD" wrote:

actually its modern ASPI that helps make it more useful but as a rule I don't use it unless necessary.

Well, I'm sure you just made a typo, but it's probably ACPI you mean...

Also, APIC can help stuff too by providing up to 255 IRQ's.

(ACPI = Advanced Configuration and Power Interface)
(APIC = Advanced Programmable Interrupt Controller)

...

 

[JAD]

PS with Windows 'ME' or XP

"JAD" wrote:

yes I typo'd
I have tried to use the #1 pci With a P4B266 asus board (not new /not old) with a sound card (CSBA2P resource hog) and it was a no go with an AGP ATI AIW vid card.

"Martin Eriksson" wrote:
"JAD" wrote:

actually its modern ASPI that helps make it more useful but as a rule I don't use it unless necessary.

Well, I'm sure you just made a typo, but it's probably ACPI you mean...

...

 

[Shepo.]

On Sat, 04 Oct 2003 20:21:29 GMT, Knowing that it was a Hollywood invention that lemmings jump off cliffs "John Smith" wrote :

Does the PCI slot next to the AGP slot on the newer P4 motherboards with the Intel 865 or 875 chipsets (Springdale or Canterwood) still share an IRQ like on the older PIII mainboards (BX chipsets, etc) thus rendering it basically not useable?

Thanks, JS

Most commonly,Yes.

There are by design only 4 hardware IRQs on PC Mother Boards and this cannot ever be changed whilst PCs,"Rule-The-Roost" as it's part of the badly designed and original 2086 specs that are a legacy that we all suffer :/

Quote:
Q:
If you could design/re-design the PC chip and had no limitations and money and market forces against you where would you start?"
A:
I'd work for Motorola.

Ex IBM micro chip engineer.

This is not now and has not been a limitation for Microsoft Operating systems since the introduction in Win 95B of PCI IRQ Bus Master Sharing.

The problems occur when hardware device makers are too lazy,cheap or too stupid to make their devices comply to these protocols.

I have,and on purpose,installed devices on PCI slot 1 against the AGP slot to test the robustness of the IRQ sharing of the devices.Some passed.Some screwed up the system thus proving my premiss.

I have even(And because of my masochism) installed 3 sound cards and got them running.Windows no likely this(Heh.Heh)

 

[Richard Hopkins]

"Michael Cecil" wrote:

Mostly a moot point these days with so many video cards needing that space for their active cooling solutions.

Indeedy. Makes me wonder how long it'll be before board manufacturers start leaving a space between the AGP and upper PCI slot for this very reason.

 

[Skid]

"Richard Hopkins" wrote:

"Michael Cecil" wrote:
Mostly a moot point these days with so many video cards needing that
space for their active cooling solutions.

Indeedy. Makes me wonder how long it'll be before board manufacturers start leaving a space between the AGP and upper PCI slot for this very reason.
--

Don't hold your breath. The current trend seems to be putting audio, LAN, etc, on the board, which means fewer people need multiple PCI slots. I can remember when I had six PCI slots, and every one was full. (Remember Twin Voodoo 2 cards in SLI mode?)

Now I have five PCI slots, and only use two. (SCSI and NIC.)

Space constraints on mobo layouts being what they are, it's simpler to jam them together and figure there's another available if the first doesn't fit. Otherwise they'd have to eliminate a slot, and that would make the specs look less attractive to compare-by-features shoppers.

 

[Shepo.]

On Sun, 05 Oct 2003 16:54:57 GMT, Knowing that it was a Hollywood invention that lemmings jump off cliffs "Skid" wrote :

"Richard Hopkins" wrote:

"Michael Cecil" wrote:
Mostly a moot point these days with so many video cards needing that space for their active cooling solutions.

Indeedy. Makes me wonder how long it'll be before board manufacturers start leaving a space between the AGP and upper PCI slot for this very reason.
--

...

Good point.I've seen some boards now with only 3 PCI slots :/

 

[Richard Hopkins]

"Shep�" wrote:

Good point.I've seen some boards now with only 3 PCI slots :/

This was sortof my point. If you're only going to have 3/4/5 PCI slots, and there's physical space on the ATX layout for seven including the AGP, why stick the first PCI slot right next to the AGP port? There's plenty space on the board to spread things out a bit, so why not do it?

At least that way, all the PCI slots will be available no matter whether there's a single or double height graphics solution installed.

 

[Shepo.]

On Sun, 5 Oct 2003 21:03:11 +0100, Knowing that it was a Hollywood invention that lemmings jump off cliffs "Richard Hopkins" wrote :

"Shep�" wrote:

Good point.I've seen some boards now with only 3 PCI slots :/

This was sortof my point. If you're only going to have 3/4/5 PCI slots, and there's physical space on the ATX layout for seven including the AGP, why stick the first PCI slot right next to the AGP port? There's plenty space on the board to spread things out a bit, so why not do it?

At least that way, all the PCI slots will be available no matter whether there's a single or double height graphics solution installed.

I see your point on the physical side but that has nothing to do with the internal Hardware IRQ allocation/ACPI/PCI Bus Master Sharing which the OP was having trouble with or questioning.