M/board suggestions, please.

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.homebuilt (More info?)

Hi.
Would anybody like to suggest a good rock-solid m/board for the new system I
am putting together.
Requirements:
To take AMD XP2400 processor with 266 MHz FSB.
To take 3 strips of 266 MHz PC2700 DDR RAM.
Don't need built-in sound or graphics - prefer quality over gizmos.
On-board LAN would be useful, or I'll use a separate card.
On-board SCSI would be a real bonus, but can use a PCI SCSI card instead.
No known problems with Matrox graphics cards.
No known issues with Windows 2000 and Linux.
No need for SATA or RAID. Standard IDE is fine.
Basically I just need something well-made and reliable, not fancy and
complicated, which won't let me down.
TIA,
Kevin.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.homebuilt (More info?)

PC2700 RAM is 333 MHz; not 266 MHz.

--
DaveW



"Kevin Lawton" <kepla@btopenworld.com> wrote in message
news:c4rv5p$aeb$1@hercules.btinternet.com...
> Hi.
> Would anybody like to suggest a good rock-solid m/board for the new system
I
> am putting together.
> Requirements:
> To take AMD XP2400 processor with 266 MHz FSB.
> To take 3 strips of 266 MHz PC2700 DDR RAM.
> Don't need built-in sound or graphics - prefer quality over gizmos.
> On-board LAN would be useful, or I'll use a separate card.
> On-board SCSI would be a real bonus, but can use a PCI SCSI card instead.
> No known problems with Matrox graphics cards.
> No known issues with Windows 2000 and Linux.
> No need for SATA or RAID. Standard IDE is fine.
> Basically I just need something well-made and reliable, not fancy and
> complicated, which won't let me down.
> TIA,
> Kevin.
>
>
>

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.homebuilt (More info?)

Yes, you're right. Sorry.

DaveW <none@zero.org> wrote:
| PC2700 RAM is 333 MHz; not 266 MHz.
|
|
| "Kevin Lawton" <kepla@btopenworld.com> wrote in message
| news:c4rv5p$aeb$1@hercules.btinternet.com...
|| Hi.
|| Would anybody like to suggest a good rock-solid m/board for the new
|| system I am putting together.
|| Requirements:
|| To take AMD XP2400 processor with 266 MHz FSB.
|| To take 3 strips of 266 MHz PC2700 DDR RAM.
|| Don't need built-in sound or graphics - prefer quality over gizmos.
|| On-board LAN would be useful, or I'll use a separate card.
|| On-board SCSI would be a real bonus, but can use a PCI SCSI card
|| instead. No known problems with Matrox graphics cards.
|| No known issues with Windows 2000 and Linux.
|| No need for SATA or RAID. Standard IDE is fine.
|| Basically I just need something well-made and reliable, not fancy and
|| complicated, which won't let me down.
|| TIA,
|| Kevin.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.homebuilt (More info?)

DaveW wrote:
> PC2700 RAM is 333 MHz; not 266 MHz.

No it's not, it's 166Mhz, DDR.
--
~misfit~

> "Kevin Lawton" <kepla@btopenworld.com> wrote in message
> news:c4rv5p$aeb$1@hercules.btinternet.com...
>> Hi.
>> Would anybody like to suggest a good rock-solid m/board for the new
>> system I am putting together.
>> Requirements:
>> To take AMD XP2400 processor with 266 MHz FSB.
>> To take 3 strips of 266 MHz PC2700 DDR RAM.
>> Don't need built-in sound or graphics - prefer quality over gizmos.
>> On-board LAN would be useful, or I'll use a separate card.
>> On-board SCSI would be a real bonus, but can use a PCI SCSI card
>> instead. No known problems with Matrox graphics cards.
>> No known issues with Windows 2000 and Linux.
>> No need for SATA or RAID. Standard IDE is fine.
>> Basically I just need something well-made and reliable, not fancy and
>> complicated, which won't let me down.
>> TIA,
>> Kevin.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.homebuilt (More info?)

What I'm using is Crucial PC2700 - however many MHz that works out at.
A rose by any other name, etc, etc . . .
Any good ideas for a really rock-solid, stable, reliable m.board?
Kevin.

~misfit~ <> wrote:
| DaveW wrote:
|| PC2700 RAM is 333 MHz; not 266 MHz.
|
| No it's not, it's 166Mhz, DDR.
|
|| "Kevin Lawton" <> wrote in message
|| news:c4rv5p$aeb$1@hercules.btinternet.com...
||| Hi.
||| Would anybody like to suggest a good rock-solid m/board for the new
||| system I am putting together.
||| Requirements:
||| To take AMD XP2400 processor with 266 MHz FSB.
||| To take 3 strips of 266 MHz PC2700 DDR RAM.
||| Don't need built-in sound or graphics - prefer quality over gizmos.
||| On-board LAN would be useful, or I'll use a separate card.
||| On-board SCSI would be a real bonus, but can use a PCI SCSI card
||| instead. No known problems with Matrox graphics cards.
||| No known issues with Windows 2000 and Linux.
||| No need for SATA or RAID. Standard IDE is fine.
||| Basically I just need something well-made and reliable, not fancy
||| and complicated, which won't let me down.
||| TIA,
||| Kevin.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.homebuilt (More info?)

Kevin Lawton wrote:
> What I'm using is Crucial PC2700 - however many MHz that works out
> at. A rose by any other name, etc, etc . . .
> Any good ideas for a really rock-solid, stable, reliable m.board?


Asus A7N8X-X
Abit NF7
Gigabyte GA-7N400-L

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.homebuilt (More info?)

S.Heenan <sheenan@wahs.ac> wrote:
| Kevin Lawton wrote:
|| What I'm using is Crucial PC2700 - however many MHz that works out
|| at. A rose by any other name, etc, etc . . .
|| Any good ideas for a really rock-solid, stable, reliable m.board?
|
|
| Asus A7N8X-X
| Abit NF7
| Gigabyte GA-7N400-L

It sounds like somebody really likes the N-Force chipset !
Seriously, if you are suggesting that the N-Force is better than the VIA
chipset I usually use then that is advice I'll take.
Thanks,
Kevin.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.homebuilt (More info?)

Kevin Lawton wrote:
> S.Heenan <sheenan@wahs.ac> wrote:
>> Kevin Lawton wrote:
>>> What I'm using is Crucial PC2700 - however many MHz that works out
>>> at. A rose by any other name, etc, etc . . .
>>> Any good ideas for a really rock-solid, stable, reliable m.board?
>>
>>
>> Asus A7N8X-X
>> Abit NF7
>> Gigabyte GA-7N400-L
>
> It sounds like somebody really likes the N-Force chipset !
> Seriously, if you are suggesting that the N-Force is better than the
> VIA chipset I usually use then that is advice I'll take.


Prior to the Nforce2 chipset, I used VIA, from the KT133 to the KT400A and
the odd SiS or Ali. Two AMD chipsets. :0(

Those were but three boards I'd use in a personal machine. I prefer the
Nforce2 chipset mainly because it's easy to overclock with. If that wasn't a
primary concern, I can live very happily with any Abit, Asus, Epox, or
Gigabyte VIA based board.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.homebuilt (More info?)

Kevin Lawton wrote:
> What I'm using is Crucial PC2700 - however many MHz that works out
> at. A rose by any other name, etc, etc . . .
> Any good ideas for a really rock-solid, stable, reliable m.board?
> Kevin.

Yep, Soltek SL-75FRN2-L. Awesome board for the price, I've set up five of
them now and they've all been a pleasure to work with. I see no reason to
use any other board. No on-board SCSI but it does have on-board LAN.
--
~misfit~

> ~misfit~ <> wrote:
>> DaveW wrote:
>>> PC2700 RAM is 333 MHz; not 266 MHz.
>>
>> No it's not, it's 166Mhz, DDR.
>>
>>> "Kevin Lawton" <> wrote in message
>>> news:c4rv5p$aeb$1@hercules.btinternet.com...
>>>> Hi.
>>>> Would anybody like to suggest a good rock-solid m/board for the new
>>>> system I am putting together.
>>>> Requirements:
>>>> To take AMD XP2400 processor with 266 MHz FSB.
>>>> To take 3 strips of 266 MHz PC2700 DDR RAM.
>>>> Don't need built-in sound or graphics - prefer quality over gizmos.
>>>> On-board LAN would be useful, or I'll use a separate card.
>>>> On-board SCSI would be a real bonus, but can use a PCI SCSI card
>>>> instead. No known problems with Matrox graphics cards.
>>>> No known issues with Windows 2000 and Linux.
>>>> No need for SATA or RAID. Standard IDE is fine.
>>>> Basically I just need something well-made and reliable, not fancy
>>>> and complicated, which won't let me down.
>>>> TIA,
>>>> Kevin.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.homebuilt (More info?)

The Asus A7N8X is a nice motherboard I looked at the drivers for the
LAN and they had SCO Unix, and Linux drivers listed on the download.
This is the Nforce-2 Chipset and it is one of Highest Selling
Motheroboards on www.newegg.com

On Mon, 5 Apr 2004 15:49:13 +0000 (UTC), "Kevin Lawton"
<kepla@btopenworld.com> wrote:

>Hi.
>Would anybody like to suggest a good rock-solid m/board for the new system I
>am putting together.
>Requirements:
>To take AMD XP2400 processor with 266 MHz FSB.
>To take 3 strips of 266 MHz PC2700 DDR RAM.
>Don't need built-in sound or graphics - prefer quality over gizmos.
>On-board LAN would be useful, or I'll use a separate card.
>On-board SCSI would be a real bonus, but can use a PCI SCSI card instead.
>No known problems with Matrox graphics cards.
>No known issues with Windows 2000 and Linux.
>No need for SATA or RAID. Standard IDE is fine.
>Basically I just need something well-made and reliable, not fancy and
>complicated, which won't let me down.
>TIA,
>Kevin.
>
>

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.homebuilt (More info?)

Hello all!

~misfit~ wrote:
> I see no reason to use a Via board for an Athlon platform. The nForce2 is
> far superior. (I've built both).

Of course there are reasons. Actually I know about two:
1.) Price. VIA Boards are simply less expensive.
2.) Linux compatibility

A friend of mine alo recommended the nForce chipset to me, so I nearly
bought the Gigabyte GA-7N400-L myself.
But after doing some research and talking with other people I found out
that there can be some compatibility issues with the nForce2-Chipset and
Linux.
Because I use windows+linux on my system I went the secure way and have
finally chosen the 7VT600P-L from Gigabyte with the VIA KT600 chipset.
Sure, the VIA is not as fast as the nforce-chipset. But I guess it will
still be fast enough (at least for me).
Now I'm paying 10 Euro less then for the nForce-Board and even get
better mainboard features. Namely +2 USB Ports and added S-ATA controller.

Benjamin

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.homebuilt (More info?)

~misfit~ wrote:

> I don't use Linux and the OP didn't mention wanting to run Linux so it
> didn't come into my mind.

Of course he did:

Kevin Lawton wrote:
>>No known issues with Windows 2000 and Linux.

> As for Via being cheaper, you get what you pay for.

Well, that something is inexpensive doesn't mean that it's bad.
Sure, if the intention ist to build windows-only gaming platform I would
totally agree and say "pay a bit more and go for the nForce-boards",
because that really seems the area in wich the nForce seems to excel in
comparision to VIA-boards (at least for the AthlonXP).
But if gaming isn't your main concern, and you you want a platform wich
runs without any problems under different operating-systems, it seems a
valid option to safe some money and choose the chipset with less problems.
And btw. I always had VIA-chipset boards and never had any problems, so
I guess they can't be all that bad.
Well, at the end it boils all down to what you want, what you need, and
how much you intend to pay for it.
Well, I guess I will see how my own system will run when I got all the
components, wich will hopefully be next week.
And maybe I will even compare it to my friends system who orderd a
nForce-board together with my own board, and will have a more or less
similar system.

greetings,
Benjamin

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.homebuilt (More info?)

~misfit~ <misfit61nz@yahoomung.co.nz> wrote:
| Benjamin Neu wrote:
|| Hello all!
||
|| ~misfit~ wrote:
||| I see no reason to use a Via board for an Athlon platform. The
||| nForce2 is far superior. (I've built both).
||
|| Of course there are reasons. Actually I know about two:
|| 1.) Price. VIA Boards are simply less expensive.
|| 2.) Linux compatibility
||
|| A friend of mine alo recommended the nForce chipset to me, so I
|| nearly bought the Gigabyte GA-7N400-L myself.
|| But after doing some research and talking with other people I found
|| out that there can be some compatibility issues with the
|| nForce2-Chipset and Linux.
|| Because I use windows+linux on my system I went the secure way and
|| have finally chosen the 7VT600P-L from Gigabyte with the VIA KT600
|| chipset. Sure, the VIA is not as fast as the nforce-chipset. But I
|| guess it will still be fast enough (at least for me).
|| Now I'm paying 10 Euro less then for the nForce-Board and even get
|| better mainboard features. Namely +2 USB Ports and added S-ATA
|| controller.
|
| I don't use Linux and the OP didn't mention wanting to run Linux so it
| didn't come into my mind.
|
| As for Via being cheaper, you get what you pay for.

As the OP. I did specify that I need a system which will run both Windows
2000 and Linux. :-o
I have put a 'trial run' system together using an AMD XP2400 on a GA-7VRXP
and Linux - Red Hat 9 - dropped in on it like a dream. 20 minutes from FDISK
to running 'Tux Racer'. Problem is, Win 2000 just won't install on it. I've
tried several fresh HDs and at every attempt it just hangs as the 'Starting
Windows' progress bar completes.
I guess that the easy-as-pie Linux install shows that the hardware is
working fine, so what's up with Windows 2000 ?
I've installed Windows 2000 on several VIA chipset machines previously and
always been pleased at the performance and reliability, but they were a
little older than the new one in question.
Any ideas of what might be wrong here would be welcomed. Could it be that
Windows 2000 just isn't compatible with the VIA KT333 chipset ?
TIA
Kevin.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.homebuilt (More info?)

"Benjamin Neu" <ondarion@gmx.de> wrote in message
news:c55jfu$2o6ra7$1@ID-3391.news.uni-berlin.de...
> ~misfit~ wrote:
>
> > I don't use Linux and the OP didn't mention wanting to run Linux so it
> > didn't come into my mind.
>
> Of course he did:
>
> Kevin Lawton wrote:
> >>No known issues with Windows 2000 and Linux.
>
> > As for Via being cheaper, you get what you pay for.
>
> Well, that something is inexpensive doesn't mean that it's bad.
> Sure, if the intention ist to build windows-only gaming platform I would
> totally agree and say "pay a bit more and go for the nForce-boards",
> because that really seems the area in wich the nForce seems to excel in
> comparision to VIA-boards (at least for the AthlonXP).
> But if gaming isn't your main concern, and you you want a platform wich
> runs without any problems under different operating-systems, it seems a
> valid option to safe some money and choose the chipset with less problems.
> And btw. I always had VIA-chipset boards and never had any problems, so
> I guess they can't be all that bad.
> Well, at the end it boils all down to what you want, what you need, and
> how much you intend to pay for it.
> Well, I guess I will see how my own system will run when I got all the
> components, wich will hopefully be next week.
> And maybe I will even compare it to my friends system who orderd a
> nForce-board together with my own board, and will have a more or less
> similar system.
>
> greetings,
> Benjamin

It seems that Via is usually first out of the box as well. So I never got
the price break, because it was new. I've had several, with never a problem.
I even used a Sound Blaster Audigy with a Dragon+, which was supposed to be
a fatal combo.
Later on the NForce (1) came out, and outperformed the Via. But that's the
way things are. I never noticed a real difference, just perhaps in
benchmarks.

--

Good Luck!
BB