ATTN: Franc Zabkar, I have a specific M572 question, if I may... [Archive]

thanatoid

August 30th 08, 04:07 PM

Franc, I would really appreciate an answer to this simple
question regarding the difference between the M571 (which you
have so comprehensively discussed on the M571 site) and the M572
which I have.

The M571 site talks rather casually about using AMD K-2
processors up to 450 or 500MHz, even though the "stated" max CPU
speed of the two MB's is 300MHz. I now have the original
Pentium 166MMX and I can certainly live with it, but I also have
3 AMD processors which could be put to better use than as
mobiles hanging off the ceiling :-)

I tried an AMD 333 and a 350 last night, and could not get them
to work. (A shop nearby gave them to me for free :-)

I happen to also have a 450 but I never even dreamed of trying
it.

Here's the question:

It would /appear/ that the great advantage of the M571 is that
FSB settings, CPU base speed multipliers, voltage etc. settings
are achieved by using jumpers, which makes almost anything
possible - apparently including using those fast chips.

In the M572, I do not see any of those jumper settings. All
CPU's appear to be "recognized" and "processed" by the BIOS and
there is little that can be done. So putting a 350 let alone a
450 AMD in a 572 may be impossible while it /was/ possible in
the M571.

Is this correct or am I missing something? I should mention I am
not brave enough to snip connections with a nail clipper and
replace resistors - I will only work with the BIOS and jumpers.
I am willing to flash the BIOS to a later version - but without
actually going through the process, I don't know whether it will
allow me to use the faster chips with the M572, since little
info is available on what the BIOS upgrade actually "upgrades"
%-{

Terribly sorry to bother you with this, but it appears you are
the official world expert on the M57x's and have been kind
enough to help me in the past.

Thanks,

t.

thanatoid

August 31st 08, 12:42 AM

Franc Zabkar > wrote in
:

> First let me respectively suggest that a hardware newsgroup
> (a.c.h.p-h), whose name I can't mention without triggering
> the m.p.w.g_d filter bot, would provide more useful
> information. There is an individual named Paul who is
> particularly knowledgeable about Intel chipsets.

I will look in the NG list and try to find this group. Thanks.

> But in answer your question, I've done limited work on
> motherboards with software selectable CPU settings simply
> because there is usually no way or no reason to defeat
> this. However, there was a PnP version of the M571 called
> the M571LMR which did have an override capability, although
> undocumented.
>
> See http://members.optusnet.com.au/~fzabkar/LMRvcore.txt

Will do.

> I don't know what to suggest to you other than to try the
> 990224S BIOS update. FWIW, my M571's 990421S AMI BIOS of
> around the same date supports my AMD K6-2 450MHz CPU,
> albeit on an SiS chipped board. Yours uses an Intel i430TX
> chipset.

I have DL'd it, and also the "sj" (AOT "s") version by some guy
from the Netherlands which he claims even allows the use of K6-
2+ chips.

I used to be /really/ afraid of messing with stuff this deep (I
realize it's not even /that/ deep) but last night's experience
with adding the SDRAM and trying the different processors was
strangely calm overall. The MB very nicely informed me in red
letters "CPU configuration incorrect" - I tried all the others,
and none worked, so I'm back on the P166.

I actually flashed a BIOS upgrade once before, MANY years ago,
but since I had no reason to keep it and it was mainly an
experiment in whether, as so many say, "try to flash the BIOS,
and you will see a big flash and have to buy a new machine" was
true or not, I went back to the original one. Now there seems to
be a very good reason to try the new BIOS upgrades.

> I notice that your BIOS setup gives you choices of
> 60/66.6/75/83.3 for the CPU base frequency, 2.0V to 3.5V in
> 0.1V increments for the CPU Vcore, and multipliers of
> 2/2.5/3/4/4.5/5/5.5 and 1.5x/3.5x. If you can get your
> system to POST (Catch-22)

I don't know what POST is but I'll Google for it. Took me a LONG
time (albeit AGES ago) to find out what Catch-22 meant, since I
never read the book or saw the movie :-)

> then you could try manually
> matching these figures against AMD's specs. Note that at
> least some of the K6-2 and K6-3 CPUs interpret the 2.0x
> multiplier as 6.0x.

That's a very interesting and possibly valuable piece of info.

> If you want to hack your BIOS, then
> this AMI utility will give you access to a lot of hidden
> features:
>
> http://www.users.on.net/~fzabkar/M571/AMIBCP.EXE

Wow.

> Among other things, there are a few RAM go-fast options
> which have been disabled and hidden from view. You may also
> be able to set the defaults for the CPU parameters above.

Again, wow.

> Here is the BIOS report produced by AMIBCP:
> http://www.users.on.net/~fzabkar/M572/990224S.RPT

Again... wow.

> Anyone trying to tweak their old Win98 box for better
> handling of Youtube videos, for example, may benefit from
> the above utility. Just be careful, in case you turn your
> board into scrap.

I don't care much about YouTube and multimedia in general - for
nostalgia's sake I DL'd a few music videos from the 70's which I
have never seen before - I couldn't watch them on THIS machine,
but did on the other one - but I am really just playing around.
(Although come to think of it, being able to watch some TV from
around the world would be very interesting.)

As far as killing the M572, while it would be sad if it were to
happen just as it is about to turn 11 years old with NOT a
problem EVER, I /am/ prepared for this possibility.

As an experiment, I have installed XP on my other machine (2GHz)
and it seems I will be able to adjust to it, although it is
annoying at first, even with all the classic features enabled
and all the idiot prompts disabled, etc. (Anyway, a change of
"computer lifestyle" would not be bad anyway, I am SO bored of
looking at the same desktops on both computers for all these
years!)

So if I kill this machine, I will build a new one for serious
work (i.e. non-internet) and make the 2GHz machine my internet
machine with 98SELite. It has Ethernet and USB2 built in,
needless to say. So far, XP runs perfectly well with its 256 MB
of RAM - in fact it uses almost exactly the same amount as
98SELite (!) but the machine I build will have 1 or 2 GB's since
it's just so cheap these days. The 256MB of the 2GHz computer
will be more than enough for my internet habits I imagine - if
it isn't, the machine takes up to 2GB.

I /would/ stick to 98SE, but there are no more motherboards
available that can handle 9x. I always said I will go to Linux
before I ever touch XP let alone Vista but I guess you never
know what the future holds.

> It may also be worth editing some PCI registers by using
> Wpcredit and Wpcrset (by H. Oda) and referring to Intel's
> chipset datasheet. I managed to get at least a 10%
> improvement in my RAM benchmark by doing this.

BION, I found wcprset (the current one appears to be called
wpcrs120.exe) last night. I'll look for wpcredit. Although this
stuff sounds like it will be way too advanced for me.

> BTW, I'm fairly certain that my friend's M571LMR was able
> to work with an AMD K6-2 CPU, so if your BIOS code uses a
> similar CPU module, then I can't see why your M572 should
> have any trouble either.

Well, I was certainly surprised, but as I said, so many people
seem to run fast chips (there are even 2000 and XP drivers for
the board!!!!!!!) that it certainly appears possible.

> Finally, I confess that my only real detective work with
> the M571 was in determining how to obtain undocumented
> Vcore voltages. The majority of the accumulated knowledge
> on this board was a result of a collaborative effort by
> several contributors to the EYO forum.

Well, it's very nice of you to share the credit, and I am sure
there were many contributors, as it seems to have been quite a
popular board - and for some, still is ;-) , but ever since you
were the /first/ person ever (in ten years of on-and-off asking
in various places) who /knew/ *and* cared to tell me where
Windows 9x stores the desktop icon placement info, and a few
other things, I have considered you /extremely/ knowledgeable -
and that's putting it mildly.

In fact, I almost always read your replies to almost any
question just because I know I will probably learn something I
would never find out about otherwise.

The fact you are so prompt and comprehensive in your helping
others is a rare (and much appreciated) quality among computer
experts, a lot of whom seem to enjoy thinking "I know, and you
don't, and I'm not telling you!", or worse.

Thank you again, very much.

t.