Subject: | |
From: | |
Reply To: | |
Date: | Sat, 18 Jul 1998 06:08:02 -0400 |
Content-Type: | text/plain |
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
At 10:16 PM 7/17/1998 Joel Bluming wrote:
>
>Thanks for your quick responses. I put the AMD chip in without changing
>anything and, lo and behold, it works. It's to soon to tell, but some
>filters in Photoshop seem to run a bit slower. I'm running it on NT 4.0.
>Seems stable so far.
>John, you suggest I run the chip at 120 instead of 100. The manual has 4
>jumpers for clock speen, but no chart for specific speeds, only
>combinations for different CPUs. There are specs for indels thru 100MZ,
>and AMD thru 100, including the 40 and 80. Is there a way to decifer
>which jumpers control the speed and which control the multiplier?
Joel:
The Math Co-Processor of the Intel is likely better than the
AMD, so applications using floating point math would run
faster on the Intel.
On the AMD-120, you would leave the CLOCK multiplier
the same (at 3X, or DX4, whatever), but you would increase
the BUS speed to 40 MHz. That will push your RAM and PCI
timing up a notch. If you have 60-nanosecond 72-pin RAM
and an up to date PCI video card, there should be no problem.
Good luck.
John Chin
|
|
|