P5A motherboard, socket 7

G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.asus (More info?)

I was given the above MB. What kind of case and power supply do I
need to build a PC around it?

It also has a CPU on it. When I take off the fan on top of it, the
top of CPU is covered with the white thermal grease(?). How do I find
out what CPU I have on the MB?

TIA
 
Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.asus (More info?)

In article <64e817b9.0407192012.7a290131@posting.google.com>,
0b3hks001@sneakemail.com wrote:

> I was given the above MB. What kind of case and power supply do I
> need to build a PC around it?
>
> It also has a CPU on it. When I take off the fan on top of it, the
> top of CPU is covered with the white thermal grease(?). How do I find
> out what CPU I have on the MB?
>
> TIA

Files for the motherboard are here:
http://www.asus.com.tw/support/download/item.aspx?ModelName=P5A&Type=All

Manual:
http://www.asus.com.tw/pub/ASUS/mb/sock7/ali/p5a/p5a-107.pdf

CPU to use - socket7, K6 type popular:
http://www.asus.com.tw/support/cpusupport/cpusupport.aspx

Disk less than or equal to 137GB:
http://www.asuscom.de/support/FAQ/faq076_32gb_ide_hdd.htm

Comments:
http://web.inter.nl.net/hcc/J.Steunebrink/k6plus.htm

It looks like it takes an ATX power supply.

You may want to pick up some more thermal grease for the CPU.
A thin layer, enough to fill any air gaps, is placed on the
CPU, before you put the fan back on it. You don't want to put
too much, so that is oozes over everything. For example, you
don't want the grease to touch any electrical parts, like the
pins on the socket, any small SMT capacitors, resistors etc.
Arctic Ceramique would be OK.

The only product I don't recommend, is zinc white grease, and
that sounds almost like what you have on there right now. The
zinc grease is available at Radio Shack, and it tends to separate
into a silicone oil that "runs away" from the area of application,
and tends not to give good contact for very long.

Some other posters here, can comment on the cache issue, once
you figure out what kind of processor you've got. Cacheable
memory is affected by processor choice, and if the memory is
not backed up by the cache, processor operation can be a lot
slower than it needs to be. One problem with an old board like
this, is you may not be able to run a modern OS with enough
memory to make it worthwhile. If the motherboard comes with
a disk, the best part of it will be the OS that runs in a
decently small memory footprint.

This list of processors may give you some idea as to what you've
got. You'll need to read the lettering on the top of the processor,
and try to match it to an entry in the table. Then post back
with the info, so the "olde cache experts" can give advice.

http://users.erols.com/chare/elec.htm

HTH,
Paul
 
Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.asus (More info?)

nospam@needed.com (Paul) wrote in message news:<nospam-2007040331120001@192.168.1.177>...
> In article <64e817b9.0407192012.7a290131@posting.google.com>,
> 0b3hks001@sneakemail.com wrote:
>
> > I was given the above MB. What kind of case and power supply do I
> > need to build a PC around it?
> >
> > It also has a CPU on it. When I take off the fan on top of it, the
> > top of CPU is covered with the white thermal grease(?). How do I find
> > out what CPU I have on the MB?
> >
> > TIA
>
> Files for the motherboard are here:
> .....

Thanks for the links.

> It looks like it takes an ATX power supply.

What type of computer case do I need? Can I re-use the one I have for
my old 486DX2 case?

I assume I can't re-use the power supply from my 486DX2 computer.
What is the basic difference -- voltage?

> You may want to pick up some more thermal grease for the CPU.
> A thin layer, enough to fill any air gaps, is placed on the
> CPU, before you put the fan back on it. You don't want to put
> too much, so that is oozes over everything. For example, you
> don't want the grease to touch any electrical parts, like the
> pins on the socket, any small SMT capacitors, resistors etc.
> Arctic Ceramique would be OK.
>
> The only product I don't recommend, is zinc white grease, and
> that sounds almost like what you have on there right now. The
> zinc grease is available at Radio Shack, and it tends to separate
> into a silicone oil that "runs away" from the area of application,
> and tends not to give good contact for very long.

What color is the Arctic Ceramique? If it is white, how do I tell
what thermal grease I have? And what do you mean that the zinc grease
tends to "runs away"? And under what conditions will it "runs away"?

> Some other posters here, can comment on the cache issue, once
> you figure out what kind of processor you've got. Cacheable
> memory is affected by processor choice, and if the memory is
> not backed up by the cache, processor operation can be a lot
> slower than it needs to be. One problem with an old board like
> this, is you may not be able to run a modern OS with enough
> memory to make it worthwhile. If the motherboard comes with
> a disk, the best part of it will be the OS that runs in a
> decently small memory footprint.
>
> This list of processors may give you some idea as to what you've
> got. You'll need to read the lettering on the top of the processor,
> and try to match it to an entry in the table. Then post back
> with the info, so the "olde cache experts" can give advice.
>
> http://users.erols.com/chare/elec.htm

I wipe away the grease and the markings on the CPU are as follows:

AMD - K2/500AFX
2.2v Core / 3.3v I/O
A 9937 GPMW
Copyright 1998

> CPU to use - socket7, K6 type popular:
> http://www.asus.com.tw/support/cpusupport/cpusupport.aspx

Under this link, I find K2/500; but no K2/500AFX. What does AFX
represent?
Is the CPU 500 MHz?

And what is K6-2/500 equivalent to in Intel -- PII, PIII, Celeron,
etc.?

From the Manual: Level 2 Cache is 512KB/1MB pipelined-burst SRAM/L2
memory cache and integretated Tag Ram to make use of 100 MHz buss
speed possible.

How much is Level 1 Cache?

Would appreciate any other comments on the Cache.


> Comments:
> http://web.inter.nl.net/hcc/J.Steunebrink/k6plus.htm

I assume that k6-2/500AFX is NOT K6plus; and therefore that is of no
concern to me. If correct, you can ignore the balance of this post.

IF K6plus DOES concern me, then

Under this link, I find:

"To be able to run these babies [K6-2+ and K6-III+] in your desktop,
the motherboard should have the following features:

Selection for 2.0V or 2.1V CPU Core Voltage
100MHz Front Side Bus"

And
"Due to a hardware problem, P5A Rev 1.05 and 1.06 will work extremely
slow with a K6plus CPU."

I have the P5A Rev 1.06. And the Core Voltage is 2.2v. Is 2.2v
considered to be close enough to 2.0v or 2.1v? If not, what does it
mean?


> HTH,
> Paul

Thanks, Paul.
 
Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.asus (More info?)

nospam@needed.com (Paul) wrote in message news:<nospam-2007042310220001@192.168.1.177>...
> In article <64e817b9.0407201555.2bdb3569@posting.google.com>,
> 0b3hks001@sneakemail.com wrote:
>
> I have placed my answers in-line...
>
> > nospam@needed.com (Paul) wrote in message
> news:<nospam-2007040331120001@192.168.1.177>...
> > > In article <64e817b9.0407192012.7a290131@posting.google.com>,
> > > 0b3hks001@sneakemail.com wrote:
> > >
> > > > I was given the above MB. What kind of case and power supply do I
> > > > need to build a PC around it?
> > > >
> > > > It also has a CPU on it. When I take off the fan on top of it, the
> > > > top of CPU is covered with the white thermal grease(?). How do I find
> > > > out what CPU I have on the MB?
> > > >
> > > > TIA
> > >
> > > Files for the motherboard are here:
> > > .....
> >
> > Thanks for the links.
> >
> > > It looks like it takes an ATX power supply.
> >
> > What type of computer case do I need? Can I re-use the one I have for
> > my old 486DX2 case?
> >
> > I assume I can't re-use the power supply from my 486DX2 computer.
> > What is the basic difference -- voltage?
>
> Your 486DX2 could be using an AT power supply. It has two connectors,
> called P8 and P9 to carry the voltages....

Thanks. This and the thermal grease are informative.

> > ....

> > I wipe away the grease and the markings on the CPU are as follows:
> >
> > AMD - K2/500AFX
> > 2.2v Core / 3.3v I/O
> > A 9937 GPMW
> > Copyright 1998
>
> This line from the elec.htm page seems to match.
>
> K6-2-500AFX 2.2V (2.1V~2.3V) 2.4V 3.3V (3.135V~3.6V) 3.6V
> 12.5A 0.69A 12.45W 20.75W 65° C
>
> I end up here:
>
> http://www.amd.com/us-en/Processors/ProductInformation/0,,30_118_1260_1217^1102,00.html
>
> K6-2 Datasheet (5.7MB)
> ........

The rest of the response is too technical for me.

The markings on the ALI Aladdin V AGPset chip are as follows:

M1541 A1
100 HMz
0004 TS07
XD431790000G
Taiwan

The markings on another ALI chip on the MB are as follows:

M1543C A1
0001 TM05
XBC65200000E
Taiwan

The markings on the Cache chip are as follows:

TM TE CH [TM is double height; and "TE" is on top of "CH" next to TM]
T35L646A-5Q
TA16100 9952

The MB is P5A, rev 1.06

I was planning to build a PC around this P5A motherboard -- for backup
purpose, when my main computer needs service -- since I got the MB for
free, and I have extra HD, video cards, CD ROM, etc.; and all I need
to buy is a case and power supply.

Basically, if I have to use this backup PC, it would be for
spreadsheet, word processing, email, web browsing.

So the bottom line question is should I build a backup PC around this
MB? Or should I move on to another MB?

Thanks in advance.


> I downloaded the K6-III datasheet, and it has integrated L2, meaning the
> K5-III doesn't have the same cache issue. The K6-2 you've got relies
> on the cache chip/tag ram on the motherboard (as it is likely the M1541
> tag is busted, so the external tag is part of the solution). K6-2 has 32K
> I-cache and 32K D-cache internally for L1.
>
> Here is the Asus Germany FAQ page, unique to them. Sprechen sie Deutsch ?
> The "ALi V" section states the limits as a function of the Northbridge
> version. Your board likely has a cacheable limit of 128MB of RAM, and
> with that, an older OS with a smaller memory footprint will be required.
> But, check the rev into anyway, you might get lucky.
>
> http://www.asuscom.de/support/FAQ/faq.htm
> http://www.asuscom.de/support/FAQ/faq045_cacheable_area.htm (see ALi V)
>
> Even this info can be incorrect, and that is where the "cache
> experts" come into play. They will know the situation with your
> board, and perhaps if you post the info printed on the top of the
> Northbridge, they can be more accurate with their prediction.
> I'm sure they will correct me 🙂
>
> If you want to become an armchair expert, try "m1541 cache" as two
> search terms in groups.google.com .
>
> http://groups.google.com/groups?threadm=35E08E71.54BECA98%40pc.highway.ne.jp
>
> From this FAQ:
> http://groups.google.com/groups?threadm=7mo0gb%24ik1%245%40ra.ins.de
>
> "The Aladdin V possesses an internal 16Kx10 tag, which can apparent be
> quite flexibly addressed. ALi indicates (without additional external
> tags) a cacheable AREA of 512 MT for 512K Cache and 1 GB for 256 K
> Cache, which suggests that that can be addressed day also as 8Kx20 -
> with 256K Cache could be covered with it the entire physical address
> area of 4 GB. With 1 MT Cache is necessary an external tag; with a
> quantity 32Kx10 the cacheable AREA would cover likewise 4 GB.
> Unfortunately internal tag RAM of the Aladdin V does not work at
> present reliably (source: c't 15/98), so that an external tag is
> necessary. At present. boards are equipped with this chip set with
> 512K Cache and 8 bit tag, which leads cacheable AREA of 128 MT to.
> Allegedly internal tag should be error free in the revision the F
> of the chip set, which confirmed nobody in de.comp.sys.ibm PC
> however still. So far also still boards with older revisions are
> in the trade."
>
> >
> > > CPU to use - socket7, K6 type popular:
> > > http://www.asus.com.tw/support/cpusupport/cpusupport.aspx
> >
> > Under this link, I find K2/500; but no K2/500AFX. What does AFX
> > represent?
> > Is the CPU 500 MHz?
> >
> > And what is K6-2/500 equivalent to in Intel -- PII, PIII, Celeron,
> > etc.?
> >
> > From the Manual: Level 2 Cache is 512KB/1MB pipelined-burst SRAM/L2
> > memory cache and integretated Tag Ram to make use of 100 MHz buss
> > speed possible.
> >
> > How much is Level 1 Cache?
> >
> > Would appreciate any other comments on the Cache.
> >
> >
> > > Comments:
> > > http://web.inter.nl.net/hcc/J.Steunebrink/k6plus.htm
> >
> > I assume that k6-2/500AFX is NOT K6plus; and therefore that is of no
> > concern to me. If correct, you can ignore the balance of this post.
> >
> > IF K6plus DOES concern me, then
> >
> > Under this link, I find:
> >
> > "To be able to run these babies [K6-2+ and K6-III+] in your desktop,
> > the motherboard should have the following features:
> >
> > Selection for 2.0V or 2.1V CPU Core Voltage
> > 100MHz Front Side Bus"
> >
> > And
> > "Due to a hardware problem, P5A Rev 1.05 and 1.06 will work extremely
> > slow with a K6plus CPU."
> >
> > I have the P5A Rev 1.06. And the Core Voltage is 2.2v. Is 2.2v
> > considered to be close enough to 2.0v or 2.1v? If not, what does it
> > mean?
> >
> >
> > > HTH,
> > > Paul
> >
> > Thanks, Paul.
>
> Good luck,
> Paul
 
Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.asus (More info?)

In article <64e817b9.0407212111.704e27d1@posting.google.com>,
0b3hks001@sneakemail.com wrote:

> nospam@needed.com (Paul) wrote in message
news:<nospam-2007042310220001@192.168.1.177>...
> > In article <64e817b9.0407201555.2bdb3569@posting.google.com>,
> > 0b3hks001@sneakemail.com wrote:
> >
> > I have placed my answers in-line...
> >
> > > nospam@needed.com (Paul) wrote in message
> > news:<nospam-2007040331120001@192.168.1.177>...
> > > > In article <64e817b9.0407192012.7a290131@posting.google.com>,
> > > > 0b3hks001@sneakemail.com wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > I was given the above MB. What kind of case and power supply do I
> > > > > need to build a PC around it?
> > > > >
> > > > > It also has a CPU on it. When I take off the fan on top of it, the
> > > > > top of CPU is covered with the white thermal grease(?). How do I find
> > > > > out what CPU I have on the MB?
> > > > >
> > > > > TIA
> > > >
> > > > Files for the motherboard are here:
> > > > .....
> > >
> > > Thanks for the links.
> > >
> > > > It looks like it takes an ATX power supply.
> > >
> > > What type of computer case do I need? Can I re-use the one I have for
> > > my old 486DX2 case?
> > >
> > > I assume I can't re-use the power supply from my 486DX2 computer.
> > > What is the basic difference -- voltage?
> >
> > Your 486DX2 could be using an AT power supply. It has two connectors,
> > called P8 and P9 to carry the voltages....
>
> Thanks. This and the thermal grease are informative.
>
> > > ....
>
> > > I wipe away the grease and the markings on the CPU are as follows:
> > >
> > > AMD - K2/500AFX
> > > 2.2v Core / 3.3v I/O
> > > A 9937 GPMW
> > > Copyright 1998
> >
> > This line from the elec.htm page seems to match.
> >
> > K6-2-500AFX 2.2V (2.1V~2.3V) 2.4V 3.3V (3.135V~3.6V) 3.6V
> > 12.5A 0.69A 12.45W 20.75W 65° C
> >
> > I end up here:
> >
> >
http://www.amd.com/us-en/Processors/ProductInformation/0,,30_118_1260_1217^1102,00.html
> >
> > K6-2 Datasheet (5.7MB)
> > ........
>
> The rest of the response is too technical for me.

That's OK. I write the post as I'm doing my research, so there
tends to be a lot of irrelevant info in there. My purpose for
including it, is to show what I've been reading.

>
> The markings on the ALI Aladdin V AGPset chip are as follows:
>
> M1541 A1
> 100 HMz
> 0004 TS07
> XD431790000G
> Taiwan

That is enough info right there. The letter "G" on the end of
the XD431790000G says you have a revision G Northbridge. You
got a good one! From the Asus FAQ045:

ALi V
ALI V - Revision Cache - Größe Cacheable Area
M1541/42 A1 / Rev. D 512kB oder 1MB 128MB
M1541/42 A1 / Rev. E 512kB oder 1MB 128MB
M1541/42 A1 / Rev. G 512kB 512MB <----------
M1541/42 A1 / Rev. G 1MB 4GB <----------

Chipsatzaufschrift (Northbridge)
P5A/P5A-VM
ALI
M1541 A1
100 MHz
xxxx  xxxx
xxxxxxxxxxxG (bzw. D oder  E) <------ Yours has "G" as well.
TAIWAN

What this means is, you can use at least 512MB of memory on the
motherboard, and it will be cacheable in the external cache RAM.
Apparently, the TAG ram inside the "G" Northbridge works, so the
TAG ram outside the Northbridge is not needed. The cache chip
external to the Northbridge is still used, and the size of
the chip (512KB or 1MB) determines whether 512MB or 4GB is
cacheable. If the memory wasn't all cacheable, you would notice
a slowdown. As it is, this motherboard should be quite usable
as an email/word processing machine.

>
> The markings on another ALI chip on the MB are as follows:
>
> M1543C A1
> 0001 TM05
> XBC65200000E
> Taiwan
>
> The markings on the Cache chip are as follows:
>
> TM TE CH [TM is double height; and "TE" is on top of "CH" next to TM]
> T35L646A-5Q
> TA16100 9952
>
> The MB is P5A, rev 1.06
>
> I was planning to build a PC around this P5A motherboard -- for backup
> purpose, when my main computer needs service -- since I got the MB for
> free, and I have extra HD, video cards, CD ROM, etc.; and all I need
> to buy is a case and power supply.
>
> Basically, if I have to use this backup PC, it would be for
> spreadsheet, word processing, email, web browsing.
>
> So the bottom line question is should I build a backup PC around this
> MB? Or should I move on to another MB?
>
> Thanks in advance.

Since I cannot find the T35L646A-5Q part, I don't know if it
is the TAG ram or the cache chip, or whether it is 512KB or 1MB.
But with at least 512MB of motherboard memory cacheable, you should
be able to put a usable amount of RAM on the board. I hope you
already own suitable RAM, because otherwise the price of the RAM
might make this project less worthwhile. Checking crucial.com, I
see they list some 256MB modules for P5A, so you could use two
like that to build a 512MB machine, which should go well with
Win98SE or even a later OS.

By the way, I'm surprised a cache expert didn't answer this
question for you. They must all be on vacation 🙂

Have fun,
Paul

>
>
> > I downloaded the K6-III datasheet, and it has integrated L2, meaning the
> > K5-III doesn't have the same cache issue. The K6-2 you've got relies
> > on the cache chip/tag ram on the motherboard (as it is likely the M1541
> > tag is busted, so the external tag is part of the solution). K6-2 has 32K
> > I-cache and 32K D-cache internally for L1.
> >
> > Here is the Asus Germany FAQ page, unique to them. Sprechen sie Deutsch ?
> > The "ALi V" section states the limits as a function of the Northbridge
> > version. Your board likely has a cacheable limit of 128MB of RAM, and
> > with that, an older OS with a smaller memory footprint will be required.
> > But, check the rev into anyway, you might get lucky.
> >
> > http://www.asuscom.de/support/FAQ/faq.htm
> > http://www.asuscom.de/support/FAQ/faq045_cacheable_area.htm (see ALi V)
> >
> > Even this info can be incorrect, and that is where the "cache
> > experts" come into play. They will know the situation with your
> > board, and perhaps if you post the info printed on the top of the
> > Northbridge, they can be more accurate with their prediction.
> > I'm sure they will correct me 🙂
> >
> > If you want to become an armchair expert, try "m1541 cache" as two
> > search terms in groups.google.com .
> >
> > http://groups.google.com/groups?threadm=35E08E71.54BECA98%40pc.highway.ne.jp
> >
> > From this FAQ:
> > http://groups.google.com/groups?threadm=7mo0gb%24ik1%245%40ra.ins.de
> >
> > "The Aladdin V possesses an internal 16Kx10 tag, which can apparent be
> > quite flexibly addressed. ALi indicates (without additional external
> > tags) a cacheable AREA of 512 MT for 512K Cache and 1 GB for 256 K
> > Cache, which suggests that that can be addressed day also as 8Kx20 -
> > with 256K Cache could be covered with it the entire physical address
> > area of 4 GB. With 1 MT Cache is necessary an external tag; with a
> > quantity 32Kx10 the cacheable AREA would cover likewise 4 GB.
> > Unfortunately internal tag RAM of the Aladdin V does not work at
> > present reliably (source: c't 15/98), so that an external tag is
> > necessary. At present. boards are equipped with this chip set with
> > 512K Cache and 8 bit tag, which leads cacheable AREA of 128 MT to.
> > Allegedly internal tag should be error free in the revision the F
> > of the chip set, which confirmed nobody in de.comp.sys.ibm PC
> > however still. So far also still boards with older revisions are
> > in the trade."
> >
> > >
> > > > CPU to use - socket7, K6 type popular:
> > > > http://www.asus.com.tw/support/cpusupport/cpusupport.aspx
> > >
> > > Under this link, I find K2/500; but no K2/500AFX. What does AFX
> > > represent?
> > > Is the CPU 500 MHz?
> > >
> > > And what is K6-2/500 equivalent to in Intel -- PII, PIII, Celeron,
> > > etc.?
> > >
> > > From the Manual: Level 2 Cache is 512KB/1MB pipelined-burst SRAM/L2
> > > memory cache and integretated Tag Ram to make use of 100 MHz buss
> > > speed possible.
> > >
> > > How much is Level 1 Cache?
> > >
> > > Would appreciate any other comments on the Cache.
> > >
> > >
> > > > Comments:
> > > > http://web.inter.nl.net/hcc/J.Steunebrink/k6plus.htm
> > >
> > > I assume that k6-2/500AFX is NOT K6plus; and therefore that is of no
> > > concern to me. If correct, you can ignore the balance of this post.
> > >
> > > IF K6plus DOES concern me, then
> > >
> > > Under this link, I find:
> > >
> > > "To be able to run these babies [K6-2+ and K6-III+] in your desktop,
> > > the motherboard should have the following features:
> > >
> > > Selection for 2.0V or 2.1V CPU Core Voltage
> > > 100MHz Front Side Bus"
> > >
> > > And
> > > "Due to a hardware problem, P5A Rev 1.05 and 1.06 will work extremely
> > > slow with a K6plus CPU."
> > >
> > > I have the P5A Rev 1.06. And the Core Voltage is 2.2v. Is 2.2v
> > > considered to be close enough to 2.0v or 2.1v? If not, what does it
> > > mean?
> > >
> > >
> > > > HTH,
> > > > Paul
> > >
> > > Thanks, Paul.
> >
> > Good luck,
> > Paul
 
Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.asus (More info?)

nospam@needed.com (Paul) wrote in message news:<nospam-2207040551430001@192.168.1.177>...
> In article <64e817b9.0407212111.704e27d1@posting.google.com>,
> 0b3hks001@sneakemail.com wrote:
>
> > nospam@needed.com (Paul) wrote in message
> news:<nospam-2007042310220001@192.168.1.177>...
> > > In article <64e817b9.0407201555.2bdb3569@posting.google.com>,
> > > 0b3hks001@sneakemail.com wrote:
> > >
> > > I have placed my answers in-line...
> > >
> > > > nospam@needed.com (Paul) wrote in message
> news:<nospam-2007040331120001@192.168.1.177>...
> > > > > In article <64e817b9.0407192012.7a290131@posting.google.com>,
> > > > > 0b3hks001@sneakemail.com wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > I was given the above MB. What kind of case and power supply do I
> > > > > > need to build a PC around it?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > It also has a CPU on it. When I take off the fan on top of it, the
> > > > > > top of CPU is covered with the white thermal grease(?). How do I find
> > > > > > out what CPU I have on the MB?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > TIA

> > > > ....
>
> > > > I wipe away the grease and the markings on the CPU are as follows:
> > > >
> > > > AMD - K2/500AFX
> > > > 2.2v Core / 3.3v I/O
> > > > A 9937 GPMW
> > > > Copyright 1998
> > >
> > > .....
> >
> > The markings on the ALI Aladdin V AGPset chip are as follows:
> >
> > M1541 A1
> > 100 HMz
> > 0004 TS07
> > XD431790000G
> > Taiwan
>
> That is enough info right there. The letter "G" on the end of
> the XD431790000G says you have a revision G Northbridge. You
> got a good one! From the Asus FAQ045:
>
> ALi V
> ALI V - Revision Cache - Größe Cacheable Area
> M1541/42 A1 / Rev. D 512kB oder 1MB 128MB
> M1541/42 A1 / Rev. E 512kB oder 1MB 128MB
> M1541/42 A1 / Rev. G 512kB 512MB <----------
> M1541/42 A1 / Rev. G 1MB 4GB <----------
>
> Chipsatzaufschrift (Northbridge)
> P5A/P5A-VM
> ALI
> M1541 A1
> 100 MHz
> xxxx  xxxx
> xxxxxxxxxxxG (bzw. D oder  E) <------ Yours has "G" as well.
> TAIWAN
>
> What this means is, you can use at least 512MB of memory on the
> motherboard, and it will be cacheable in the external cache RAM.
> Apparently, the TAG ram inside the "G" Northbridge works, so the
> TAG ram outside the Northbridge is not needed. The cache chip
> external to the Northbridge is still used, and the size of
> the chip (512KB or 1MB) determines whether 512MB or 4GB is
> cacheable. If the memory wasn't all cacheable, you would notice
> a slowdown. As it is, this motherboard should be quite usable
> as an email/word processing machine.

If I understand it correctly, I can be sure that that the PC can use
up to 512MB of RAM. If I put in more, the PC may not recognize the
extra RAM.

I am not clear about the external cache RAM. What is it?

And I am curious as to what is the size of the L2 Cache .


> > The markings on another ALI chip on the MB are as follows:
> >
> > M1543C A1
> > 0001 TM05
> > XBC65200000E
> > Taiwan
> >
> > The markings on the Cache chip are as follows:
> >
> > TM TE CH [TM is double height; and "TE" is on top of "CH" next to TM]
> > T35L646A-5Q
> > TA16100 9952
> >
> > The MB is P5A, rev 1.06
> >
> > I was planning to build a PC around this P5A motherboard -- for backup
> > purpose, when my main computer needs service -- since I got the MB for
> > free, and I have extra HD, video cards, CD ROM, etc.; and all I need
> > to buy is a case and power supply.
> >
> > Basically, if I have to use this backup PC, it would be for
> > spreadsheet, word processing, email, web browsing.
> >
> > So the bottom line question is should I build a backup PC around this
> > MB? Or should I move on to another MB?
> >
> > Thanks in advance.
>
> Since I cannot find the T35L646A-5Q part, I don't know if it
> is the TAG ram or the cache chip, or whether it is 512KB or 1MB.
> .......

My fault. After I posted my previous message, I noticed in the manual
that this chip relates to the IDE Controller.

Thanks for all the help, Paul.
 
Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.asus (More info?)

In article <64e817b9.0407221950.70006e53@posting.google.com>,
0b3hks001@sneakemail.com wrote:

<<snip>>
> >
> > What this means is, you can use at least 512MB of memory on the
> > motherboard, and it will be cacheable in the external cache RAM.
> > Apparently, the TAG ram inside the "G" Northbridge works, so the
> > TAG ram outside the Northbridge is not needed. The cache chip
> > external to the Northbridge is still used, and the size of
> > the chip (512KB or 1MB) determines whether 512MB or 4GB is
> > cacheable. If the memory wasn't all cacheable, you would notice
> > a slowdown. As it is, this motherboard should be quite usable
> > as an email/word processing machine.
>
> If I understand it correctly, I can be sure that that the PC can use
> up to 512MB of RAM. If I put in more, the PC may not recognize the
> extra RAM.
>
> I am not clear about the external cache RAM. What is it?
>
> And I am curious as to what is the size of the L2 Cache .

The PC will recognize the ram. The question is whether the L2
cache will be working or not. If the L2 cache is not working,
then every access that misses in the L1 cache, will have to go
to main memory. That is what I mean by slowing down the computer.

There are some posts in Google that discuss the P5A and caching.
They mention the L2 cache is direct mapped, and that the internal
tag ram in the Northbridge is rated for 83MHz. Which is strange if
it is possible to use a 100MHz FSB processor with the board.
I wonder if the L2 cache gets disabled at 100MHz ? Now you understand
why I need the services of one of the "olde cache experts".

Your processor has 32K I cache and 32K D cache at the L1 level.
If the external L2 cache is working, the chip holds 512KB and is
direct mapped. Direct mapped cache are less effective than
associative caches, so it may not be valid to compare the 512KB
size of your L2, to the L2 on a modern processor.

As for the DIMMs themselves, it is possible this board could be
sensitive to high density ram. For example, on a 440BX board,
like a P2B, some 256MB DIMMs only show up as 128MB of memory,
and it has to do with insufficient address bits for the multiplexed
address bus (the memory chips are too "deep" to be addressed
properly). If you already own 256MB DIMMs, just plug them in
and test them, to see if they are compatible. If buying the DIMMs
new, buy them from crucial.com, so you know you are getting the
right kind. A CAS2 memory would be the fastest. (I don't know
if the M1541 has this issue for a fact, but finding info like
this for an old chipset is going to be difficult. That is why
I recommend buying from crucial.com)

>
> > Since I cannot find the T35L646A-5Q part, I don't know if it
> > is the TAG ram or the cache chip, or whether it is 512KB or 1MB.
> > .......
>
> My fault. After I posted my previous message, I noticed in the manual
> that this chip relates to the IDE Controller.
>
> Thanks for all the help, Paul.

I wish I could recommend something to benchmark your project with,
but I don't know what good numbers would be for memory bandwidth
on a P5A. If the only input cost in this project is a PSU, then
this will be a reasonably cheap experiment. You could set it up
initially on a table top, and just plug everything together.
Maybe that way, you could figure out whether it works well enough
to justify buying a case for it.

Have fun,
Paul
 
Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.asus (More info?)

Thanks again, Paul. I have 2 sticks of 256MB of PC133 RAM (one from
PNY and one from Infineon). I'll try that after I get a PSU. You
have any suggestion for a ATX PSU for a project like mine -- brand
name and wattage?


nospam@needed.com (Paul) wrote in message news:<nospam-2307040711130001@192.168.1.177>...
> In article <64e817b9.0407221950.70006e53@posting.google.com>,
> 0b3hks001@sneakemail.com wrote:
>
> <<snip>>
> > >
> > > What this means is, you can use at least 512MB of memory on the
> > > motherboard, and it will be cacheable in the external cache RAM.
> > > Apparently, the TAG ram inside the "G" Northbridge works, so the
> > > TAG ram outside the Northbridge is not needed. The cache chip
> > > external to the Northbridge is still used, and the size of
> > > the chip (512KB or 1MB) determines whether 512MB or 4GB is
> > > cacheable. If the memory wasn't all cacheable, you would notice
> > > a slowdown. As it is, this motherboard should be quite usable
> > > as an email/word processing machine.
> >
> > If I understand it correctly, I can be sure that that the PC can use
> > up to 512MB of RAM. If I put in more, the PC may not recognize the
> > extra RAM.
> >
> > I am not clear about the external cache RAM. What is it?
> >
> > And I am curious as to what is the size of the L2 Cache .
>
> The PC will recognize the ram. The question is whether the L2
> cache will be working or not. If the L2 cache is not working,
> then every access that misses in the L1 cache, will have to go
> to main memory. That is what I mean by slowing down the computer.
>
> There are some posts in Google that discuss the P5A and caching.
> They mention the L2 cache is direct mapped, and that the internal
> tag ram in the Northbridge is rated for 83MHz. Which is strange if
> it is possible to use a 100MHz FSB processor with the board.
> I wonder if the L2 cache gets disabled at 100MHz ? Now you understand
> why I need the services of one of the "olde cache experts".
>
> Your processor has 32K I cache and 32K D cache at the L1 level.
> If the external L2 cache is working, the chip holds 512KB and is
> direct mapped. Direct mapped cache are less effective than
> associative caches, so it may not be valid to compare the 512KB
> size of your L2, to the L2 on a modern processor.
>
> As for the DIMMs themselves, it is possible this board could be
> sensitive to high density ram. For example, on a 440BX board,
> like a P2B, some 256MB DIMMs only show up as 128MB of memory,
> and it has to do with insufficient address bits for the multiplexed
> address bus (the memory chips are too "deep" to be addressed
> properly). If you already own 256MB DIMMs, just plug them in
> and test them, to see if they are compatible. If buying the DIMMs
> new, buy them from crucial.com, so you know you are getting the
> right kind. A CAS2 memory would be the fastest. (I don't know
> if the M1541 has this issue for a fact, but finding info like
> this for an old chipset is going to be difficult. That is why
> I recommend buying from crucial.com)
>
> >
> > > Since I cannot find the T35L646A-5Q part, I don't know if it
> > > is the TAG ram or the cache chip, or whether it is 512KB or 1MB.
> > > .......
> >
> > My fault. After I posted my previous message, I noticed in the manual
> > that this chip relates to the IDE Controller.
> >
> > Thanks for all the help, Paul.
>
> I wish I could recommend something to benchmark your project with,
> but I don't know what good numbers would be for memory bandwidth
> on a P5A. If the only input cost in this project is a PSU, then
> this will be a reasonably cheap experiment. You could set it up
> initially on a table top, and just plug everything together.
> Maybe that way, you could figure out whether it works well enough
> to justify buying a case for it.
>
> Have fun,
> Paul
 
Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.asus (More info?)

On 20 Jul 2004 16:55:17 -0700, in <alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.asus>,
0b3hks001@sneakemail.com wrote:
>
> nospam@needed.com (Paul) wrote in message
> news:<nospam-2007040331120001@192.168.1.177>...
[snip]
>
> > It looks like it takes an ATX power supply.
>
> What type of computer case do I need? Can I re-use the one I have for
> my old 486DX2 case?
>
[snip]

You really ought to buy a proper ATX-type case & PSU combo. The board itself
is an ATX "form factor", which means that it would be a real jury-rig job to
fit it into an AT-type case, even if you retrofit an ATX PSU into it. (FYI:
The P5B was the functionally near-identical board, made in the "Baby AT" form
factor -- *that* would be a drop-in fit to your old '486c case/PSU.) This
being an older board, you *don't* need the "latest & greatest" seventeen
gigawatt PSU with every whistle and bell known to the marketing mavens; hence,
a suitable case/PSU combo of passable (if not wonderful) quality can be had
for perhaps US$50 or so (or even much less, if you're willing to scrape the
very low end of the market; but I don't suggest that).

> I assume I can't re-use the power supply from my 486DX2 computer.
> What is the basic difference -- voltage?
>
[snip]

It goes beyond that. The "ATX" spec defines almost the whole internal system
layout, which is very different than the older "AT"/"Baby AT" styles. The
board itself is a different shape/size; (most of) the I/O connectors depend on
a dedicated "sub-panel" in the back of the case; even the placement of the CPU
relative to the drive bays can come into play. WRT the PSU itself, not only
are the connectors different (and largely incompatible; tho' there are
adapters available to use an ATX supply with an AT mobo), there are whole new
functions and voltage rails, such as the "Standby 5V" rail that is used to
enable the "soft ON/OFF" function already mentioned. In short, AT and ATX are
apples and oranges -- don't attempt to mix them.

> > The only product I don't recommend, is zinc white grease, and
> > that sounds almost like what you have on there right now. The
> > zinc grease is available at Radio Shack, and it tends to separate
> > into a silicone oil that "runs away" from the area of application,
> > and tends not to give good contact for very long.
>
> What color is the Arctic Ceramique? If it is white, how do I tell
> what thermal grease I have? And what do you mean that the zinc grease
> tends to "runs away"? And under what conditions will it "runs away"?
>
[snip]

Don't let Paul's comments spook you. While exotic thermal compounds are one
of the favorite tweaks of the obsessive/compuslive "I just can't leave well
enough alone" set; they aren't really *needed* in most cases. Run-of-the-mill
zinc-oxide based thermal compound (like you'll find at Radio Shack) will work
just fine for virtually all reasonable applications, as long as it is fresh
and properly applied. And once that's done, it should remain OK for at least
several years, as long as it is not disturbed. (Yes, it will dry out with age
and heat-cycling, but that's OK -- it's the zinc oxide powder that's actually
doing the job; the grease/oil part is just a "carrier" to enable smooth and
even application.) It's worth noting that standard-issue zinc-oxide compound
is what is used millions of times every day in production environments by
virtually every major electronics manufacturer extant; if it were unreliable,
they'd all have horrendous warranty issues with it -- which in general, they
don't.

> I wipe away the grease and the markings on the CPU are as follows:
>
> AMD - K2/500AFX
[snip]

Are you *sure* it doesn't say (probably on the third line):

AMD - K6-2/500AFX

???

Look again -- I strongly suspect that's what you'll find.

> Under this link, I find K2/500; but no K2/500AFX.
[snip]

Same thing, at least for all intents and purposes.

> What does AFX represent?
[snip]

It's a "stepping" designation -- i.e., it denotes precisely which of the
various sub-versions of the K6-2 your particular CPU is. These sub-versions
(of which there are almost always many) are *usually* due to minor tweaks and
updates routinely carried out by the manufacturer during the production life
of a given CPU; also, in a few cases, they designate special variants (like
ultra low-power versions intended for laptop use). But in this case, "AFX"
simply denotes one of the late-production "standard" K6-2 chips. Don't sweat
it -- it's a good one.

> Is the CPU 500 MHz?
>
[snip]

That's the factory rating, yes. It can actually be run at a wide variety of
core clocks and FSB clocks; but that depends on the mobo (among other things)
and how you set it up in that mobo.

> And what is K6-2/500 equivalent to in Intel -- PII, PIII, Celeron,
> etc.?
>
[snip]

It's not *directly* equivalent to any of them; but the closest match would be
to a P-II/P-III of approximately 10-20% higher core clock rate. Clock for
clock, the AMD chip will generally out-perform the Intel chip for "normal"
applications; but the Intel will have an edge on FPU-intensive stuff.

> From the Manual: Level 2 Cache is 512KB/1MB pipelined-burst SRAM/L2
> memory cache and integretated Tag Ram to make use of 100 MHz buss
> speed possible.
>
> How much is Level 1 Cache?
>
[snip]

Either 512KB or 1MB; it depends on how much SRAM is actually installed on that
particular board. The easiest way to determine which you have is to run
CACHECHK:

<http://www.filelibrary.com:8080/cgi-bin/freedownload/DOS/h/54/cachchk7.zip>

on it after you've got the system assembled.

If you want to know about this *before* you assemble and boot up the system,
you'll need to check *your* board against the manual to determine which.
First, download the manual for your particular Rev. level:

<http://www.asus.com.tw/pub/ASUS/mb/sock7/ali/p5a/p5a-106.pdf>

Look at either the photograph on Page 11 or the diagram on Page 12, and find
the chip labeled "512KB/1MB Pipelined Burst L2 Cache". Now find the
corresponding chip on *your* board, write down *all* the numbers
etched/sceended on it, then hit Google to find the appropriate spec-sheet or
data-book pages. The main thing you want to know is, is it a 4Mbit chip, or
an 8Mbit chip? If the former, you have 512K L2 cache; if the latter, you have
1MB L2 cache.

That said, even the minimum possibility (512K L2 cache, with a 512MB
"cacheable area") will be *more* than adequate for your stated purposes; so I
wouldn't worry about it.

> I assume that k6-2/500AFX is NOT K6plus; and therefore that is of no
> concern to me. If correct, you can ignore the balance of this post.
>
[snip]

Correct. The "Plus" versions of the K6 series CPUs were later models aimed
mostly at the laptop market (but also *very* usable in desktop systems, and a
favorite of overclockers due to its low power-consumption/heat-dissipation).

--

Jay T. Blocksom
--------------------------------
Appropriate Technology, Inc.
usenet01[at]appropriate-tech.net

"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary
safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
-- Benjamin Franklin, Historical Review of Pennsylvania, 1759.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Unsolicited advertising sent to this domain is expressly prohibited under
47 USC S227 and State Law. Violators are subject to prosecution.
 
Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.asus (More info?)

On Thu, 22 Jul 2004 05:50:57 -0400, in <alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.asus>,
nospam@needed.com (Paul) wrote:
>
[snip]

> But with at least 512MB of motherboard memory cacheable, you should
> be able to put a usable amount of RAM on the board. I hope you
> already own suitable RAM, because otherwise the price of the RAM
> might make this project less worthwhile. Checking crucial.com, I
> see they list some 256MB modules for P5A, so you could use two
> like that to build a 512MB machine, which should go well with
> Win98SE or even a later OS.
>
[snip]

While it near-certainly can't hurt, 512MB is gross overkill for a typical
Win98 system. Unless he's doing something *very* memory-intensive (such as
video editing, or some Photoshop functions, for example) even 64MB would be
"minimally adequate", 128MB would be "comfortably" adequate, and 256MB would
be well up on the "diminishing returns" curve. Ditto (or nearly so) for any
sane Linux-based system. Like I said, more RAM (probably) can't hurt (at
least up to a point... Win9x has known "issues"[1] with more than 512MB
installed in the system); but please don't imply that he *needs* it.


[1] -
<http://support.microsoft.com:80/support/kb/articles/q253/9/12.asp&NoWebContent=1&NoWebContent=1>


--

Jay T. Blocksom
--------------------------------
Appropriate Technology, Inc.
usenet01[at]appropriate-tech.net

"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary
safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
-- Benjamin Franklin, Historical Review of Pennsylvania, 1759.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Unsolicited advertising sent to this domain is expressly prohibited under
47 USC S227 and State Law. Violators are subject to prosecution.
 
Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.asus (More info?)

On 23 Jul 2004 17:02:36 -0700, in <alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.asus>,
0b3hks001@sneakemail.com wrote:
>
> Thanks again, Paul. I have 2 sticks of 256MB of PC133 RAM (one from
> PNY and one from Infineon).
[snip]

Those will probably work; but test them one at a time (if they're "double
sided", the mobo *may* insist that you use only DIMM slots #1 and #3, or maybe
even just #1). Besides, 256MB will be more than adequate for your purposes,
as long as you keep the software load reasonable.

OTOH, if it turns out you need to buy memory, I *strongly* suggest that you
stick to ECC DIMMs, such as can be found at reasonable cost ($28/128MB) here:

<http://castle.pricewatch.com/search/searchmc.idq?cr=SDRAM+ECC&qc=%22SDRAM%22*+AND+%22ECC%22*+AND+%40ctd+33&i=33&ct=Computer&c=System+Memory&mi=N&m=N>

This *may* impose a small performance penalty (the manual for your mobo
mentions that using ECC at FSB clocks above 83.33 MHz is "not supported";
which, it should be noted, is not quite the same thing as "it won't work");
but IMCO, it's more than worth it for the reliability peace-of mind. No
matter how you slice it, this system is never going to be a barn-burner,
performance-wise; that's simply not its purpose in life. Therefore, it makes
sense to optimize it for reliability, above all else.

> I'll try that after I get a PSU. You
> have any suggestion for a ATX PSU for a project like mine -- brand
> name and wattage?
>
[snip]

As I mentioned in another f'up, you need a whole new case/PSU. But fear
not... There are scads of low-cost possibilities:

<http://www.pricewatch.com/h/prc.aspx?i=74&a=2871&f=1>
<http://castle.pricewatch.com/search/searchmc.idq?cr=ATX+++350w+&qc=%22ATX%22*+AND+%22350W%22*+AND+%40ctd+74&i=74&ct=Computer&c=Case&mi=N&m=N>
<http://www.pricewatch.com/h/prc.aspx?i=74&a=2870&f=1>

--

Jay T. Blocksom
--------------------------------
Appropriate Technology, Inc.
usenet01[at]appropriate-tech.net

"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary
safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
-- Benjamin Franklin, Historical Review of Pennsylvania, 1759.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Unsolicited advertising sent to this domain is expressly prohibited under
47 USC S227 and State Law. Violators are subject to prosecution.
 
Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.asus (More info?)

0b3hks001@sneakemail.com schrieb:

> Thanks again, Paul. I have 2 sticks of 256MB of PC133 RAM (one from
> PNY and one from Infineon). I'll try that after I get a PSU. You
> have any suggestion for a ATX PSU for a project like mine -- brand
> name and wattage?

Virtually anything should do, even a 110 W Astec part like mine here, or
some 145 W Sparkle/Fotron. (A K6-2 500 draws little more than 20 watts
max, and you're not likely to put in a power-hungry graphics card or
plenty of hard drives.) You may want to look out for a PSU that doesn't
make your ears fall off, unfortunately most older ones are not really
among them. (The noise level from mine was still acceptable but not
ultra-quiet prior to the fan replacement, it's OK now.) The performance
of the system should easily be sufficient for a backup word processing
machine. BTW, in case you haven't got it yet, download the users manual
for the P5A in PDF form from one of the ASUS FTP servers.

Stephan
--
Meine Andere Seite: http://stephan.win31.de/
PC#6: i440BX, 1xP3-500E, 512 MiB, 18+80 GB, R9k AGP 64 MiB, 110W
This is a SCSI-inside, Legacy-plus, TCPA-free computer :)
Mail to From: not read, see homepg. | Real gelesene Mailadr. s. Homep.
 
Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.asus (More info?)

In article <ce0mdu$vdh$04$1@news.t-online.com>, Stephan Grossklass
<sgrossklass@yahoo.de> wrote:

> 0b3hks001@sneakemail.com schrieb:
>
> > Thanks again, Paul. I have 2 sticks of 256MB of PC133 RAM (one from
> > PNY and one from Infineon). I'll try that after I get a PSU. You
> > have any suggestion for a ATX PSU for a project like mine -- brand
> > name and wattage?
>
> Virtually anything should do, even a 110 W Astec part like mine here, or
> some 145 W Sparkle/Fotron. (A K6-2 500 draws little more than 20 watts
> max, and you're not likely to put in a power-hungry graphics card or
> plenty of hard drives.) You may want to look out for a PSU that doesn't
> make your ears fall off, unfortunately most older ones are not really
> among them. (The noise level from mine was still acceptable but not
> ultra-quiet prior to the fan replacement, it's OK now.) The performance
> of the system should easily be sufficient for a backup word processing
> machine. BTW, in case you haven't got it yet, download the users manual
> for the P5A in PDF form from one of the ASUS FTP servers.
>
> Stephan

Which means, the readily available 300 or 350W supplies that
come with computer cases, should work fine. At my local computer
stores, it is difficult to buy an ATX case without a power supply,
so that is likely what will come bundled with it. Modern supplies
have their fan speed turned down, and that means your computer
case must have at least one additional case fan blowing out on
the back of the case, as the power supply fan alone is not enough
to properly cool the case. The objective of the cooling, is to
keep the disk drive cool, as it is the least rugged part of the
computer. An acceptable temperature difference between the air
inside the case and room temperature, is about 7C, according to
AMD. Now, with your cool running processor, this should be easy
to do.

HTH,
Paul
 
Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.asus (More info?)

Jay T. Blocksom <not.deliverable+USENET@appropriate-tech.net> wrote in message news:<npk4g09fa5c24qgchgcbj330gl2ei1j66e@news.rcn.com>...
> On 20 Jul 2004 16:55:17 -0700, in <alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.asus>,
> 0b3hks001@sneakemail.com wrote:
> >
> > nospam@needed.com (Paul) wrote in message
> > news:<nospam-2007040331120001@192.168.1.177>...
> [snip]
> >
> > > It looks like it takes an ATX power supply.
> >
> > What type of computer case do I need? Can I re-use the one I have for
> > my old 486DX2 case?
> >
> [snip]
>
> You really ought to buy a proper ATX-type case & PSU combo. The board itself
> is an ATX "form factor", which means that it would be a real jury-rig job to
> fit it into an AT-type case, even if you retrofit an ATX PSU into it. (FYI:
> ...........

Thanks for the info. on this, thermal grease, and K6-2/500AFX, cache, etc.


> AMD - K2/500AFX
> [snip]
>
> Are you *sure* it doesn't say (probably on the third line):
>
> AMD - K6-2/500AFX

You are right. It was my typo.


>...........
>
> --
>
> Jay T. Blocksom
> --------------------------------
> Appropriate Technology, Inc.
> usenet01[at]appropriate-tech.net
>
> "They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary
> safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
> -- Benjamin Franklin, Historical Review of Pennsylvania, 1759.
> - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
> Unsolicited advertising sent to this domain is expressly prohibited under
> 47 USC S227 and State Law. Violators are subject to prosecution.
 
Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.asus (More info?)

First off, sorry my comments are not very timely. Proceed with caution
here. From memory, and experience, the P5A was very picky when it came
to memory. I remember something about the P5A's FSB not being able to
run at 100MHz when using ECC SDRAM? Also, I believe the P5A's ALi
chipset cannot cache more then 128MB memory?

In addition, check if your mainboard is a P5A-B, if so, this version of
the P5A had connector's for BOTH AT and ATX power supplies, which means
you may be able to recycle your existing chassis and AT P/S.

Steven

Jay T. Blocksom wrote:

> On 23 Jul 2004 17:02:36 -0700, in <alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.asus>,
> 0b3hks001@sneakemail.com wrote:
> >
> > Thanks again, Paul. I have 2 sticks of 256MB of PC133 RAM (one from
> > PNY and one from Infineon).
> [snip]
>
> Those will probably work; but test them one at a time (if they're "double
> sided", the mobo *may* insist that you use only DIMM slots #1 and #3, or maybe
> even just #1). Besides, 256MB will be more than adequate for your purposes,
> as long as you keep the software load reasonable.
>
> OTOH, if it turns out you need to buy memory, I *strongly* suggest that you
> stick to ECC DIMMs, such as can be found at reasonable cost ($28/128MB) here:
>
> <http://castle.pricewatch.com/search/searchmc.idq?cr=SDRAM+ECC&qc=%22SDRAM%22*+AND+%22ECC%22*+AND+%40ctd+33&i=33&ct=Computer&c=System+Memory&mi=N&m=N>
>
> This *may* impose a small performance penalty (the manual for your mobo
> mentions that using ECC at FSB clocks above 83.33 MHz is "not supported";
> which, it should be noted, is not quite the same thing as "it won't work");
> but IMCO, it's more than worth it for the reliability peace-of mind. No
> matter how you slice it, this system is never going to be a barn-burner,
> performance-wise; that's simply not its purpose in life. Therefore, it makes
> sense to optimize it for reliability, above all else.
>
> > I'll try that after I get a PSU. You
> > have any suggestion for a ATX PSU for a project like mine -- brand
> > name and wattage?
> >
> [snip]
>
> As I mentioned in another f'up, you need a whole new case/PSU. But fear
> not... There are scads of low-cost possibilities:
>
> <http://www.pricewatch.com/h/prc.aspx?i=74&a=2871&f=1>
> <http://castle.pricewatch.com/search/searchmc.idq?cr=ATX+++350w+&qc=%22ATX%22*+AND+%22350W%22*+AND+%40ctd+74&i=74&ct=Computer&c=Case&mi=N&m=N>
> <http://www.pricewatch.com/h/prc.aspx?i=74&a=2870&f=1>
>
 
Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.asus (More info?)

[Posted & Mailed, mostly due to time-lag issues; f'up to NG]

On 25 Jul 2004 21:59:30 -0700, in <alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.asus>,
0b3hks001@sneakemail.com wrote:
>
> Jay T. Blocksom <not.deliverable+USENET@appropriate-tech.net> wrote in
> message news:<npk4g09fa5c24qgchgcbj330gl2ei1j66e@news.rcn.com>...
[snip]

> > On 20 Jul 2004 16:55:17 -0700, in <alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.asus>,
> > 0b3hks001@sneakemail.com wrote:
> > >
> > > nospam@needed.com (Paul) wrote in message
> > > news:<nospam-2007040331120001@192.168.1.177>...
> > [snip]
> > >
> > > > It looks like it takes an ATX power supply.
> > >
> > > What type of computer case do I need? Can I re-use the one I have for
> > > my old 486DX2 case?
> > >
> > [snip]
> >
> > You really ought to buy a proper ATX-type case & PSU combo. The board
> > itself is an ATX "form factor", which means that it would be a real
> > jury-rig job to fit it into an AT-type case, even if you retrofit an ATX
> > PSU into it. (FYI: ...........
>
> Thanks for the info. on this, thermal grease, and K6-2/500AFX, cache, etc.
>
[snip]

You're quite welcome.

However, one last caveat before you go...

Steven Hilgendorf mentioned something which *may* be significant; namely, that
the PCI chipset used by that board might effectively limit the "cacheable
area" to 128MB. I'm about 95% certain that the specs I read a week or so ago
explicitly stated it was good up to 512MB; but I'm away from my reference
materials right now, so I cannot check on this definitively. In any event,
it's worth keeping in mind when you select memory. I still suggest initially
setting the system up with one of those 256MB sticks you already have (after
all, nothing is cheaper than a part you already have); but *do* test it
thoroughly with that CACHECHK utility I pointed you to earlier, and pay
particular attention to the results for addresses >128MB as compared to those
below 128MB. If you see a "step" fall-off in reported bandwidth/performance
at about that point, he's probably right -- and you would be well-advised to
*reduce* the installed memory in the system to 128MB.

BTW... If indeed you plan to set up the system under Windows of some stripe,
I second the recommendation to use Win98SE, as was suggested earlier in the
thread. For a single-user "backup" system, it will present far less of a
"load" to the hardware than the later (NT-based) versions of Windows. That
said, Win2K might also be OK, *if* the system will properly support -- i.e.,
cache -- at least 256MB of system memory; but I do *not* recommend WinXP under
any circumstances, regardless of hardware. Either way, *do* install the OS
via 98lite or 2Klite/XPlite, as appropriate, which you can find here:

<http://www.litepc.com/98lite.html>
<http://www.litepc.com/xplite.html>

And be absolutely certain that MSIE is *not* among the stuff that gets
installed.

Good luck!

--

Jay T. Blocksom
--------------------------------
Appropriate Technology, Inc.
usenet01[at]appropriate-tech.net

"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary
safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
-- Benjamin Franklin, Historical Review of Pennsylvania, 1759.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Unsolicited advertising sent to this domain is expressly prohibited under
47 USC S227 and State Law. Violators are subject to prosecution.
 
Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.asus (More info?)

Jay T. Blocksom <not.deliverable+USENET@appropriate-tech.net> wrote in message news:<lhqpg09j3atf32dgoqmfm6hsm5jbvl0kh4@news.rcn.com>...
>
> .....<snip>.....
>
> However, one last caveat before you go...
>
> Steven Hilgendorf mentioned something which *may* be significant; namely, that
> the PCI chipset used by that board might effectively limit the "cacheable
> area" to 128MB. I'm about 95% certain that the specs I read a week or so ago
> explicitly stated it was good up to 512MB; ...

That is what the manual said.


> but I'm away from my reference
> materials right now, so I cannot check on this definitively. In any event,
> it's worth keeping in mind when you select memory. I still suggest initially
> setting the system up with one of those 256MB sticks you already have (after
> all, nothing is cheaper than a part you already have); but *do* test it
> thoroughly with that CACHECHK utility I pointed you to earlier, and pay
> particular attention to the results for addresses >128MB as compared to those
> below 128MB. If you see a "step" fall-off in reported bandwidth/performance
> at about that point, he's probably right -- and you would be well-advised to
> *reduce* the installed memory in the system to 128MB.

I did the CacheChk on my laptop; and the result is as follows:

Reading from memory.
MegaByte#: --------- Memory Access Block sizes (KB)-----
1 2 4 8 16 32 64 128 256 512 1024 2048 4096
<-- KB
0: 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 5 -- -- --
us/KB
2111: 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 5 5 4 5
us/KB
2112: 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 4 4 4 4
us/KB
2113: 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 5 4 4 4
us/KB
2114: 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 5 5 4 4
us/KB
2115: 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 5 5 5 5
us/KB
2116: 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 2 4 4 4 5
us/KB
2117: 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 4 4 4 4
us/KB
This machine seems to have both L1 and L2 cache. [reading]
L1 cache is 16KB-- 965.3 MB/s 1.1 ns/byte (390%) (118%) 3.2 clks
L2 cache is 256KB-- 811.4 MB/s 1.3 ns/byte (328%) (100%) 3.8 clks

By ""step" fall-off in reported bandwidth/performance", do you mean
the equivalent of 1/2 to 5 above?


> BTW... If indeed you plan to set up the system under Windows of some stripe,
> I second the recommendation to use Win98SE, as was suggested earlier in the

That is my intention.

> thread. For a single-user "backup" system, it will present far less of a
> "load" to the hardware than the later (NT-based) versions of Windows. That
> said, Win2K might also be OK, *if* the system will properly support -- i.e.,
> cache -- at least 256MB of system memory; but I do *not* recommend WinXP under
> any circumstances, regardless of hardware. Either way, *do* install the OS
> via 98lite or 2Klite/XPlite, as appropriate, which you can find here:
>
> <http://www.litepc.com/98lite.html>
> <http://www.litepc.com/xplite.html>
>
> And be absolutely certain that MSIE is *not* among the stuff that gets
> installed.

My normal browser is Netscape and Mozilla. But I do install MSIE --
only because some web sites insists on it (e.g. Intuit; and certain
pages @ Microsoft.com).

Thanks again.


> --
>
> Jay T. Blocksom
> --------------------------------
> Appropriate Technology, Inc.
> usenet01[at]appropriate-tech.net
>
> "They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary
> safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
> -- Benjamin Franklin, Historical Review of Pennsylvania, 1759.
> - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
> Unsolicited advertising sent to this domain is expressly prohibited under
> 47 USC S227 and State Law. Violators are subject to prosecution.
 
Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.asus (More info?)

These readings are from the P5A??

Steven

0b3hks001@sneakemail.com wrote:
> Jay T. Blocksom <not.deliverable+USENET@appropriate-tech.net> wrote in message news:<lhqpg09j3atf32dgoqmfm6hsm5jbvl0kh4@news.rcn.com>...
>
>>.....<snip>.....
>>
>>However, one last caveat before you go...
>>
>>Steven Hilgendorf mentioned something which *may* be significant; namely, that
>>the PCI chipset used by that board might effectively limit the "cacheable
>>area" to 128MB. I'm about 95% certain that the specs I read a week or so ago
>>explicitly stated it was good up to 512MB; ...
>
>
> That is what the manual said.
>
>
>
>>but I'm away from my reference
>>materials right now, so I cannot check on this definitively. In any event,
>>it's worth keeping in mind when you select memory. I still suggest initially
>>setting the system up with one of those 256MB sticks you already have (after
>>all, nothing is cheaper than a part you already have); but *do* test it
>>thoroughly with that CACHECHK utility I pointed you to earlier, and pay
>>particular attention to the results for addresses >128MB as compared to those
>>below 128MB. If you see a "step" fall-off in reported bandwidth/performance
>>at about that point, he's probably right -- and you would be well-advised to
>>*reduce* the installed memory in the system to 128MB.
>
>
> I did the CacheChk on my laptop; and the result is as follows:
>
> Reading from memory.
> MegaByte#: --------- Memory Access Block sizes (KB)-----
> 1 2 4 8 16 32 64 128 256 512 1024 2048 4096
> <-- KB
> 0: 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 5 -- -- --
> us/KB
> 2111: 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 5 5 4 5
> us/KB
> 2112: 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 4 4 4 4
> us/KB
> 2113: 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 5 4 4 4
> us/KB
> 2114: 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 5 5 4 4
> us/KB
> 2115: 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 5 5 5 5
> us/KB
> 2116: 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 2 4 4 4 5
> us/KB
> 2117: 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 4 4 4 4
> us/KB
> This machine seems to have both L1 and L2 cache. [reading]
> L1 cache is 16KB-- 965.3 MB/s 1.1 ns/byte (390%) (118%) 3.2 clks
> L2 cache is 256KB-- 811.4 MB/s 1.3 ns/byte (328%) (100%) 3.8 clks
>
> By ""step" fall-off in reported bandwidth/performance", do you mean
> the equivalent of 1/2 to 5 above?
>
>
>
>>BTW... If indeed you plan to set up the system under Windows of some stripe,
>>I second the recommendation to use Win98SE, as was suggested earlier in the
>
>
> That is my intention.
>
>
>>thread. For a single-user "backup" system, it will present far less of a
>>"load" to the hardware than the later (NT-based) versions of Windows. That
>>said, Win2K might also be OK, *if* the system will properly support -- i.e.,
>>cache -- at least 256MB of system memory; but I do *not* recommend WinXP under
>>any circumstances, regardless of hardware. Either way, *do* install the OS
>>via 98lite or 2Klite/XPlite, as appropriate, which you can find here:
>>
>> <http://www.litepc.com/98lite.html>
>> <http://www.litepc.com/xplite.html>
>>
>>And be absolutely certain that MSIE is *not* among the stuff that gets
>>installed.
>
>
> My normal browser is Netscape and Mozilla. But I do install MSIE --
> only because some web sites insists on it (e.g. Intuit; and certain
> pages @ Microsoft.com).
>
> Thanks again.
>
>
>
>>--
>>
>>Jay T. Blocksom
>>--------------------------------
>>Appropriate Technology, Inc.
>>usenet01[at]appropriate-tech.net
>>
>>"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary
>>safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
>> -- Benjamin Franklin, Historical Review of Pennsylvania, 1759.
>>- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
>>Unsolicited advertising sent to this domain is expressly prohibited under
>>47 USC S227 and State Law. Violators are subject to prosecution.
 
Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.asus (More info?)

Steven Hilgendorf <stevenmhPLEASE@REMOVEwi.rr.com> wrote in message news:<wYRRc.79480$vN3.56839@twister.rdc-kc.rr.com>...

> These readings are from the P5A??

If you are referring to the results from the CacheChk, no.

If you are referring to the 512MB L2 cache, it is from P5A's manual.


> Steven
>
> 0b3hks001@sneakemail.com wrote:
> > Jay T. Blocksom <not.deliverable+USENET@appropriate-tech.net> wrote in message news:<lhqpg09j3atf32dgoqmfm6hsm5jbvl0kh4@news.rcn.com>...
> >
> >>.....<snip>.....
> >>
> >>However, one last caveat before you go...
> >>
> >>Steven Hilgendorf mentioned something which *may* be significant; namely, that
> >>the PCI chipset used by that board might effectively limit the "cacheable
> >>area" to 128MB. I'm about 95% certain that the specs I read a week or so ago
> >>explicitly stated it was good up to 512MB; ...
> >
> >
> > That is what the manual said.
> >
> >
> >
> >>but I'm away from my reference
> >>materials right now, so I cannot check on this definitively. In any event,
> >>it's worth keeping in mind when you select memory. I still suggest initially
> >>setting the system up with one of those 256MB sticks you already have (after
> >>all, nothing is cheaper than a part you already have); but *do* test it
> >>thoroughly with that CACHECHK utility I pointed you to earlier, and pay
> >>particular attention to the results for addresses >128MB as compared to those
> >>below 128MB. If you see a "step" fall-off in reported bandwidth/performance
> >>at about that point, he's probably right -- and you would be well-advised to
> >>*reduce* the installed memory in the system to 128MB.
> >
> >
> > I did the CacheChk on my laptop; and the result is as follows:
> >
> > Reading from memory.
> > MegaByte#: --------- Memory Access Block sizes (KB)-----
> > 1 2 4 8 16 32 64 128 256 512 1024 2048 4096
> > <-- KB
> > 0: 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 5 -- -- --
> > us/KB
> > 2111: 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 5 5 4 5
> > us/KB
> > 2112: 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 4 4 4 4
> > us/KB
> > 2113: 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 5 4 4 4
> > us/KB
> > 2114: 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 5 5 4 4
> > us/KB
> > 2115: 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 5 5 5 5
> > us/KB
> > 2116: 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 2 4 4 4 5
> > us/KB
> > 2117: 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 4 4 4 4
> > us/KB
> > This machine seems to have both L1 and L2 cache. [reading]
> > L1 cache is 16KB-- 965.3 MB/s 1.1 ns/byte (390%) (118%) 3.2 clks
> > L2 cache is 256KB-- 811.4 MB/s 1.3 ns/byte (328%) (100%) 3.8 clks
> >
> > By ""step" fall-off in reported bandwidth/performance", do you mean
> > the equivalent of 1/2 to 5 above?
> >
> >
> >
> >>BTW... If indeed you plan to set up the system under Windows of some stripe,
> >>I second the recommendation to use Win98SE, as was suggested earlier in the
> >
> >
> > That is my intention.
> >
> >
> >>thread. For a single-user "backup" system, it will present far less of a
> >>"load" to the hardware than the later (NT-based) versions of Windows. That
> >>said, Win2K might also be OK, *if* the system will properly support -- i.e.,
> >>cache -- at least 256MB of system memory; but I do *not* recommend WinXP under
> >>any circumstances, regardless of hardware. Either way, *do* install the OS
> >>via 98lite or 2Klite/XPlite, as appropriate, which you can find here:
> >>
> >> <http://www.litepc.com/98lite.html>
> >> <http://www.litepc.com/xplite.html>
> >>
> >>And be absolutely certain that MSIE is *not* among the stuff that gets
> >>installed.
> >
> >
> > My normal browser is Netscape and Mozilla. But I do install MSIE --
> > only because some web sites insists on it (e.g. Intuit; and certain
> > pages @ Microsoft.com).
> >
> > Thanks again.
> >
> >
> >
> >>--
> >>
> >>Jay T. Blocksom
> >>--------------------------------
> >>Appropriate Technology, Inc.
> >>usenet01[at]appropriate-tech.net
> >>
> >>"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary
> >>safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
> >> -- Benjamin Franklin, Historical Review of Pennsylvania, 1759.
> >>- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
> >>Unsolicited advertising sent to this domain is expressly prohibited under
> >>47 USC S227 and State Law. Violators are subject to prosecution.
 
Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.asus (More info?)

0b3hks001@sneakemail.com wrote:
> Steven Hilgendorf <stevenmhPLEASE@REMOVEwi.rr.com> wrote in message news:<wYRRc.79480$vN3.56839@twister.rdc-kc.rr.com>...
>
>
>>These readings are from the P5A??
>
>
> If you are referring to the results from the CacheChk, no.

I didn't think so.

> If you are referring to the 512MB L2 cache, it is from P5A's manual.

I believe you may be confused about things here. The P5A has 512KB of
on-board level two cache (not 512MB), can handle a maximum of 768MB of
PC-100 system RAM, but can ONLY cache the first 128MB of RAM. This was
a limitation of the P5A's Ali Chipset, and adding more than 128MB of RAM
may or may not be cost effective in terms of performance.

Steven

>
>
>
>>Steven
>>
>>0b3hks001@sneakemail.com wrote:
>>
>>>Jay T. Blocksom <not.deliverable+USENET@appropriate-tech.net> wrote in message news:<lhqpg09j3atf32dgoqmfm6hsm5jbvl0kh4@news.rcn.com>...
>>>
>>>
>>>>.....<snip>.....
>>>>
>>>>However, one last caveat before you go...
>>>>
>>>>Steven Hilgendorf mentioned something which *may* be significant; namely, that
>>>>the PCI chipset used by that board might effectively limit the "cacheable
>>>>area" to 128MB. I'm about 95% certain that the specs I read a week or so ago
>>>>explicitly stated it was good up to 512MB; ...
>>>
>>>
>>>That is what the manual said.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>but I'm away from my reference
>>>>materials right now, so I cannot check on this definitively. In any event,
>>>>it's worth keeping in mind when you select memory. I still suggest initially
>>>>setting the system up with one of those 256MB sticks you already have (after
>>>>all, nothing is cheaper than a part you already have); but *do* test it
>>>>thoroughly with that CACHECHK utility I pointed you to earlier, and pay
>>>>particular attention to the results for addresses >128MB as compared to those
>>>>below 128MB. If you see a "step" fall-off in reported bandwidth/performance
>>>>at about that point, he's probably right -- and you would be well-advised to
>>>>*reduce* the installed memory in the system to 128MB.
>>>
>>>
>>>I did the CacheChk on my laptop; and the result is as follows:
>>>
>>> Reading from memory.
>>> MegaByte#: --------- Memory Access Block sizes (KB)-----
>>> 1 2 4 8 16 32 64 128 256 512 1024 2048 4096
>>><-- KB
>>> 0: 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 5 -- -- --
>>> us/KB
>>>2111: 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 5 5 4 5
>>> us/KB
>>>2112: 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 4 4 4 4
>>> us/KB
>>>2113: 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 5 4 4 4
>>> us/KB
>>>2114: 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 5 5 4 4
>>> us/KB
>>>2115: 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 5 5 5 5
>>> us/KB
>>>2116: 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 2 4 4 4 5
>>> us/KB
>>>2117: 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 4 4 4 4
>>> us/KB
>>>This machine seems to have both L1 and L2 cache. [reading]
>>> L1 cache is 16KB-- 965.3 MB/s 1.1 ns/byte (390%) (118%) 3.2 clks
>>> L2 cache is 256KB-- 811.4 MB/s 1.3 ns/byte (328%) (100%) 3.8 clks
>>>
>>>By ""step" fall-off in reported bandwidth/performance", do you mean
>>>the equivalent of 1/2 to 5 above?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>BTW... If indeed you plan to set up the system under Windows of some stripe,
>>>>I second the recommendation to use Win98SE, as was suggested earlier in the
>>>
>>>
>>>That is my intention.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>thread. For a single-user "backup" system, it will present far less of a
>>>>"load" to the hardware than the later (NT-based) versions of Windows. That
>>>>said, Win2K might also be OK, *if* the system will properly support -- i.e.,
>>>>cache -- at least 256MB of system memory; but I do *not* recommend WinXP under
>>>>any circumstances, regardless of hardware. Either way, *do* install the OS
>>>>via 98lite or 2Klite/XPlite, as appropriate, which you can find here:
>>>>
>>>> <http://www.litepc.com/98lite.html>
>>>> <http://www.litepc.com/xplite.html>
>>>>
>>>>And be absolutely certain that MSIE is *not* among the stuff that gets
>>>>installed.
>>>
>>>
>>>My normal browser is Netscape and Mozilla. But I do install MSIE --
>>>only because some web sites insists on it (e.g. Intuit; and certain
>>>pages @ Microsoft.com).
>>>
>>>Thanks again.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>--
>>>>
>>>>Jay T. Blocksom
>>>>--------------------------------
>>>>Appropriate Technology, Inc.
>>>>usenet01[at]appropriate-tech.net
>>>>
>>>>"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary
>>>>safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
>>>> -- Benjamin Franklin, Historical Review of Pennsylvania, 1759.
>>>>- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
>>>>Unsolicited advertising sent to this domain is expressly prohibited under
>>>>47 USC S227 and State Law. Violators are subject to prosecution.