http://img234.exs.cx:81/img234/4020/ct47919mk.jpg
CT479
http://img234.exs.cx:81/img234/8817/ct47927zs.jpg
Jump support 100FSB/133FSB Pentium-M
X86-Secret
Printable View
http://img234.exs.cx:81/img234/4020/ct47919mk.jpg
CT479
http://img234.exs.cx:81/img234/8817/ct47927zs.jpg
Jump support 100FSB/133FSB Pentium-M
X86-Secret
pretty crazy.. been a while since i saw a cpu adpator :P
what are the odds that it works without issue. If it does, I'm on it for my AI-7
That's great. :banana4:
Now we don't need a €250 motherboard with technologies 2 years old.
I just hope it's cheap and it works good.
w00t :D
At present switches over the card to support Pentium Mr. Banias, Dothan (0.13 and 0.09 micron) and Celeron the M processor, all may support besides ULV....
At present ASUS P4P800 may 100% integrity support switch over the card... Other also must pass through the confirmation
http://img237.exs.cx:81/img237/6764/img00115166av.jpg
schematic drawing
http://img237.exs.cx:81/img237/1015/img00115185ur.jpg
can pay presents as a gift 70mm functioning with 3,000 tpm and delivering 32.5CFM for 30 dBa to the 12V ventilator
P4C800 (875P) (915P) the movement prearranges with P4GD1
Is this available anywhere? Is there a suggested retail price?
hmmm can you change the vcore n stuff cuz i noticed it has its own power circuit for the CPU. that means changing vcore in the bios has no effect?
I was hoping to get an answer on that also!!! :toast:Quote:
Originally Posted by Franky 4 Finger
It's not even on Asus' website yet so I don't expect it to appear at online retailers soon. :(
my guess is this is gonna be one hard item to get, if you can get it at all...
I just can't imagine theres a huge market of people looking for dothan adaptors, enough for them to make a zillion of them to sell.
will the adaptor effect ocing?
how will you mount cooling?
zomg...what's the MSRP on this? Im *very* interested now.
Ill take 1.
Anyone have prices?
someone email asus and ask around.
YEAH!!! i'm interested
i was thinking... since there are s478 boards that do 200fsb stock, you can get a pretty crazy fsb on a dothan with it. but how do we mount heatsinks?
Probably $30 or something like that? I wonder if it will work with non-ASUS boards.
From what I undertsan, it'll come with it's own custom heatsink.
Pretty good idea, but as the maker I'd be worried about sales since not everyone is like us.
It would be nice if it would be able to use Socket 478 heatsinks, I'd love to put my SP94 on there.
Mentioned a jumper for either 100/133 FSB processors, maybe that means you can't OC it.....? :(
Looks too wide to allow a backplate for my SP94, too bad. It'll probably only "support" Asus motherboards, and it'd be interesting to see if they were able to make them ONLY work with their boards.
About the voltage regulator on it, I dont think that means that there is no possibility of adjusting the voltage on the motherboard, it just means it has to convert one voltage to another.(I think, let me know if I'm wrong) The board probably runs on a certain voltage like 1.52v since you can't really go lower on most motherboards... But maybe Asus has integraed something into their boards.
If it doesn't allow overclocking, I doubt there will be anyone buying it.
i will take it..
where:(
Duck tape. :)Quote:
Originally Posted by cirthix
I agree. If you think the enthusiast market is a small fraction, how many people do you think are going to give up their P4s/A64s to be Greenpeace friendlier? Maybe a few SFF owners, but that's not exactly a huge market either. Give up hyperthreading on a P4 or 64-bit capability/value on an A64 for a more expensive chip to run stock at? No thanks.Quote:
Originally Posted by Foxie3a
I hope it allows overclocking, or else its just a joke.
There's a 400/533FSB switch, but surely if it ties into the existing motherboard then it must allow O/Cing if the original does?
I was thinking about that, and if that isn't suposed to OC then almost anyone will buy it!
The normal consumer doen's change the heatsink of a normal processor for temp gains, so I don't think they will buy a adapter and a new processor, so that product must be directed to us, and then it must be a Good OC Goodie! :D
I think this will greatly affect o/c'ing. Unless you were to specially make a heatsink yourself. Because of the item it raises up the original ssize of the mounting area. And heatsinks now are not designed for this. If you were to try to put a regular heatsink on it would CRUSH the cpu+adaptor. Hopefully these chips wont have any heat factors adding to it and they will still be the beast of air overclockers that they are now.
god i hope this thing supports overclocking...
Damn if that works well and will support all the features of my IC7 then Im getting one and sticking it under my Vapo LS :slobber:
more interestingly..will dual channel memory work?
I would think dual channel memory would work, isn't that chipset dependant?
I'll go look on Asus' site, and email them about MSRP since no one else has said they have and I'm curious.
yeah mem controller is on chipset, nothing to do with chip on intel...
wow, Pentium-M that works with existing asus P4 boards? thats awesome if it works. put an Pentium-m 755 2.0 dothan with 2m, someone get some benchmarks. I think the results should be outsanding.
I think FSB OCing would be hurt, all those extra traces can't be good for high speed signals.
vr-zone says it will be under 50Quote:
Originally Posted by Foxie3a
The 100/133 jumper very likely simply manipulates the BSEL pins to specify the default boot bus speed.
Hopefully this product works...I'd LOVE to see a Yonah plugged into one of these suckers...dual core for Socket 478.:D
The adapter has gotta piss Intel off something fierce...and how Intel feels about the adapter will likely be the make or break factor in whether or not Asus releases it to the retail market.
If it supports overclocking, I'm sold! I suppose you could mount a waterblock on it with some minor modding.
Good point about the jumper, I hope that's how it is too.Quote:
Originally Posted by lutjens
I doubt they would make it though if Intel didn't want it. I see more people with Asus-Intel than Asus-AMD and it's not like they're making it big with this adaptor. Besides, Socket 478 is almost gone now so maybe it's incentive to stick with Intel if you don't want to commit to an LGA775. I know that it makes me happy since I'm not switching to LGA775 and I dont want to switch to AMD either.
They should have made it so you have to bold the adaptor to the motherboard like these heavy heatsinks do, that way you can install your own massive one on it. Even if you want to use their stock heatsink it wouldn't hurt to have it bolted.
Taken from VR-Zone. :)Quote:
ASUS is going to unveil in the next few weeks an adaptor called CT-479 that allows a Pentium M mobile processor to be used on a Pentium 4 Socket 478 board. Since Pentium 4 and Pentium M has a common NetBurst Bus architecture therefore an adaptor like this is possible. This adaptor is compatible with all Pentium M processors like Banias and Dothan as well as Celeron M except ULV Pentium M due to low voltages. Dothan should be able to benefit much from the dual channel memory architecture of the 865/875/915/925X chipsets and certainly overclockability should improve greatly as well using the desktop boards with much overclocking features. At the present time, only the P4P800 is validated completely and other models should follow soon. The adaptor will be paired up with a PM cooler, a diskette and a jumper selection of FSB100/FSB133. It will be available for a decent price of under US$50.
I don't think the fsb limit is really chipset-dependant, I had two dothans 755 mounted on the same DFI855, one hit 200Mhz, the other freezes over 180Mhz (at the same frequencies, with lowered multi), also on X86-Secret, they showed the same issue, I think that's the cpu which limits the max fsb, not the chipset.
Assuming it won't allow higher o/c than the 855 based boards, it still provides cheaper, easierly available mobos, and all the new fuctions that the 855 lacks of :)
US$50 is NOT DECENT :(Quote:
Originally Posted by Cyprio
US$25-30 would be reasonable.
$50AU would IMHO be a decent priceQuote:
Originally Posted by Xassius
:)
I might want to try this baby in my Shuttle barebone.
$50 is a normal price if the product is good quality, we'll find out in a couple of weeks.
cool! for those who dont know i worked on an adapter myself, i had a prototype but there were some bugs, the system wasnt completely stable (845 board+1.4ghz banias) and it took me way too much time to build it, so i stopped working on it :(
it was really hard for me and a sad day i decided to stop working on it, but im just too busy with other things and lack the indepth knowledge to fix some of the small isues.
the asus adapter is much bigger than my prototype, looks promising therefor as they have a lot of logic on it wich probably fixes the signal voltage problem and somehow fixes the other problem of the extra ins on the pentium m i didnt know where to connect on the mobo :D
im very happy to see an adapter though, because it proves all those people wrong who told me its not possible back when i started working on it :)
HA! i was right! :D
but the adapter is comming quite late, i heard there are 915 pentium m mainboards comming out soon, wich are faster than 865/875 boards with an adapter...
but 8657/875 boards are available for really low prices now, so i think its still worth it since the 915 boards arent significatnyl faster :)
$50 sounds fine to me. just find me a place to get one ;)
Ditto. This would make a perfect SFF boxQuote:
Originally Posted by Kunaak
Why does Asus make a board, 865/875 or 915 board, that has the socket for m buidlin, without the need of any convertors.
Thanks
very good question my friend... it would be cool.Quote:
Originally Posted by elec999
small market for such a product prob. Tho, considering the number of boards it shifts in a year I'm surprised they don't produce it as say a "special" for the overclocking community...
To do with overclockin with this thing, maybe if you up the board's FSB, the FSB of the processor changes relative to the jumper setting.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Johnny Bravo
well, what im saying is if they are going to make an 855 based one with crap features and expect that to sell, how can they justify not making a 865/875/912/925 based board for it with any less expectations?
my guess for the mounting of any sort of cooling is that you still have the normal holes or retentions clips you had on the motherboard you're using. Therefore, with some adjustments, regular mounting methods should work :)
Do I hear a cascade knocking on the door? :slobber:
Isn't 915 DDRII only?Quote:
Originally Posted by saaya
Interesting. Glad I didn't sell my P4P800 yet. ;)
that's good. At least it isn't DDR only ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by iddqd
But why? DDRII so far has terrible latencies, although with decent clocks. Nothing some good TCCD can't achieve, though. But either way, with it's short pipeline, Dothan would benefit from a lower-latency memory, much like AMD chips. That's where DDRII is lacking. True, thera are new DDRII memories that can do 2-2-2 at DDRII533 (133MHz)... but there's also added internal latency due to having a quad-pumped signal translated into double data rate signal... so it's simply not as effecient as plain DDR. IMO, it should be either XDR, or nothing :D.
At the end of the day, it is bandwidth that counts. Whether it is high latency or low latency. It depends on the memory controller whether it likes high clocks or low latencies..etc..etc..etcQuote:
Originally Posted by iddqd
In current Intel desktops, DDR2 rules. If AMD adopted DDR2, no doubt you'll see 10Gb/sec Sandra buffered shots easily.
DDR2 is more suited to those with high FSB's (more than 300mhz FSB) on current desktops as for maximum performance, a 1:1 divider for DDR2 needs to be used. Since Dothans mostly stay below the 200mhz mark, we may not see a substantial gain over normal SO-DIMM DDR.
I have seen somewhere that CAS latencies on a laptop when reduced from 3 to 2 failed to procure any performance gains (was that LegitReviews.com ?)
DDR2 also produce a lot less heat - a more crucial point than performance in a laptop.
probably because cas latency doesnt have more than about 2-5% impact on bandwidth with DDR1 (ddr2 too?).
Old SDRAM boards needed tight cas latency to be quicker (and some original DDR boards), but its TRCD and TRP which are important now.
Yeah... try tunning tRcd=0. Some big performance gainst to be had there :). Dunno about Intels, but my 3200+'s memory controller loved zero tRcd... even at 100MHz, the difference was huge between 2 and 0.
What laptop are you talking about? :banana4: ... And why exactly is high bandwidth important for AMD processors? The transition from single channel to dual channel (almost doubled the bandwidth) resulted in about 3% actual performance gains. You could overclock by !80MHz to get that. Or, just get twice as much cache (ClawHammer vs Winchester :D). The only thing that really affects the performance, when scaling the memory clock, would be decreased latency (in ns, not clocks)... which plays along nicely with AMD64 architecture. I imagine it would be the same way for P6 architecture as well... since the design is pretty similar to AMD64.Quote:
Originally Posted by Xassius
yep, NO valid reason to use DDR2 apart from intel trying to push it onto everyone :rolleyes:
I was not talking about theorhetical bandwidth...but actual bandwidth. So AMD processors gained 3% more bandwidth going to dual channel (for example)Quote:
Originally Posted by iddqd
they gained more bandwidth than that, it doubled.
The bandwidth isnt holding them back, though.
bandwidth didn't double. Theorhetical bandwidth did "double" but not actual bandwidth.Quote:
Originally Posted by STEvil
What I define bandwidth is = how much data throughoutput you can access the memory at.
if you want the best memory for intel desktops. DDR2 is the way to go.Quote:
Originally Posted by alpha0ne
nahh... you gotta run them at 3:4 ratio then. then your FSB becomes the bottleneck. I say BH5 at 275mhz is good enough.
YES, but ONLY for the crippled preshat that needs all the help it can getQuote:
Originally Posted by Xassius
i mean, lets be honest, what is the preshat good for apart from heating in winter :p:
AMD needs DDR2 too. Except it can't be bothered annoying customers with yet ANOTHER CPU socket.Quote:
Originally Posted by alpha0ne
I would go for a cpu with hyperthreading any day over an AMD single core (dual core may change it all). Purely for everyday WORK (not games :p: ) and stuff.
Never use 3:4 divider for DDR2.
Something no one has brought up is speedstep. Desktop motherboards can't work with speedstep and they revert to the lowest multiplier, which would be 6 on these chips since the P-M goes down to 6x100. I guess the 133 models would do 133x6, not sure though.
So this adaptor can disable speedstep in the processor so that it keeps the multiplier? Wish they incorporated this in the motherboards we all use now. Oh well. :(
AMD wont be able to use the high-latency, high-bandwidthe of ddr2
why can't they use better memory?Quote:
Originally Posted by enzoR
<Quote:
Originally Posted by Xassius
coz DDR2 sucks
coz DDR2 pWns j00. :p:Quote:
Originally Posted by the_n00b<:o)
I fail to see why DDR2 < DDR. Especially when 9Gb/sec+ sandra buffered shots are fully feasible on an intel system.
we've had 10gb/sec+ using DDR1.
Why?
Because latency decreases due to speed of the CPU (memory controller built in) allows it to access data faster.
Between 754 and 939/940 bandwidth doubled, but useable bandwidth didnt change much because of the efficiency of AMD's setup. DDR2 might bring more increases, but its all going to be latency which is going to take some work.. like DDR2 800 @ 3-2-2-x for a starting point.
Have you ever heard of that little company, called AMD?Quote:
Originally Posted by Foxie3a
They happen to do that with Cool'n'Quiet :)
No, not 3% bandwidth. They gained 3% overall performance, though. Bandwidth does not translate into performance on a 1:1 ratio ;). Theoretical bandwidth would be 6.4Gb/s (3.2x2). However, in practice it's around 5.9Gb/s, up from 3.1Gb/s from single channel. It's a huge improvement in terms of bandwidth, but a very meager improvement in terms of performance.Quote:
Originally Posted by Xassius
Nice, i hope this adaptor will bring like FSB275 Dothans :)
... and nice threadcrapping about AMD/RAM-stuff, guys :P
Dothan are starved for bandwidth, thats why it came up and thats why everyone wants them on 478..
Well, if you'd like to compare video encoding times, BRING IT ON! :stick:Quote:
Originally Posted by alpha0ne
No latency is more significant then bandwidth in most applications. Very few programs really stream GBs worth of data. Virtually all have to load lots of small variables. In this case latency kills you. Particularly when loads take 100+ clock cycles (Dothan)!Quote:
Originally Posted by Xassius
One of the arguments in favor of dual core is that it decreases the impact of latency (which is hard as hell to lower) and shift the impact to bandwidth (which is easy to increase).
Actually it more or less did double. Theres some inefciency, but its small.Quote:
bandwidth didn't double. Theorhetical bandwidth did "double" but not actual bandwidth.
What I define bandwidth is = how much data throughoutput you can access the memory at.
Err do you not understand the difference between bandwidth and performance?Quote:
I was not talking about theorhetical bandwidth...but actual bandwidth. So AMD processors gained 3% more bandwidth going to dual channel (for example)
if you want to have a discussion about ddr2 vrs ddr, amd vrs intel, go somewhere else, leave it out of this thread.
10Gb/sec. Yep OPB. That's not everyone. I said that 9Gb/sec+ scores will be achieved fairly easily.Quote:
Originally Posted by STEvil
Why do you decrease latency? To increase bandwidth.Quote:
Originally Posted by saratoga
memory with latencies of 5-5-5-12 at 1000mhz will transfer small packets of data faster than 2-2-2-5 at 200mhz.
No. THe two are unrelated. Increaseing or decreaseing one does not change the other.Quote:
Originally Posted by Xassius
You're thinking of throughput which is something very different, and is specific to each and every piece of code (there is no throughput for a processor, just for a given piece of code on a given processor). I suggest you check google, or a textbook. THis sort of thing is covered in the intro to many networking and engineering texts. I won't argue this any further because its not relevent to the thread.
By the same token, I could argue that I scale the clock to decrease the latency. Why, at 275MHz 2-2-2, the latency is much lower than at 200MHz 2-2-2.Quote:
Originally Posted by Xassius
Oh, sorry. I meant to say Pentium-M. That's riiight. Pentium-M. :banana:
and I was just reading the "p4 4ghz cancelled thread" :) (alot of p-m in there)
I hope (like everyone else) that ocing will be possible
guys lets keep this thread alive (and flameless), if anyone gets a sample, please oh please post
D
PS by the way how come all p-ms at newegg show s478 ?
agreed.Quote:
Originally Posted by iddqd
Oh! sorry. I was defining bandwidth as throughput :p: Just like in sandra... I always referred to the scores as "bandwidth". Will have to learn my vocab.
I don't think the Dothan is too starved for memory "throughput" in my opinion. It's got the 2mb Cache to help it's pipeline along.
Also - it's sad that we won't see any adaptors for LGA775 :(
Sorry, I didn't mean that I wished they had speedstep in the motherboards, I meant to say that I wish that they were able to disable it if you would put a mobile processor in a desktop board, instead of the multiplier going down to 12.Quote:
Originally Posted by wimpie007
12x200 is 2400mhz, and most 478 boards can scale well past that pretty easily.
yeah but how much FSB can the dothan handle?
I think not much more than just above 200mhz, 210-220mhz in the best case I think.
But we'll see, I hope I'm wrong.
i guess no one has ever had it in a good chipset to find out eh?
Personally, I think the Dothan has been chipset limited. The i855 is more or less a rehash of the i845, which had trouble making it near 200 even in its PE incarnation. Sure, some would do it, but not all.
I saw a review were a 133mhz Dothan hit 190mhz fsb on an i855 chipset while the 100mhz Dothan only did 160mhz or so.
Does the i855 has some sort of switch for both 100mhz and 133mhz, if so than they were both limited by the board failing to lockt the agp/pci frequenty.
In that case we'll just have to waith untill the adapter is for sale.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ZL1
there is only 478 pins on dothan, but the pinout is different, hence it being incompatible with desktop mobo's, so they call it socket 479 in hopes of avioding confusion
oh, cool, thanks !Quote:
Originally Posted by Revv23
Dan
They could have called it stocket M. Or something.Quote:
Originally Posted by Revv23
I have a 100fsb 1.6 that does 193fsb quite easy on 855, I have a feeling it will do well over 200 on an 875 board if the socket adapter allows for high fsb's.
its going to be a new ball game with dothan +ddr1 dual channel, a whole new breed of cool quiet gaming rigs will be born ;)
asus could revitalize DDR, socket 478, and intel's enthusiast populatirty all in one fell swoop if a device like this performes well.
:toast:Quote:
Originally Posted by Revv23
I hope this works out. As much as I love my winnie I am sick and tired of the AMD fanboys.
personally i'm looking forward to "Yonah".
Theres too many problems trying to run Dothan in a desktop, just not enough bandwidth.
hopefully Yonah will be 800FSB and DDR1 dual channel, or even 1066FSB if poss :)
another chip i'm looking forward to is Intels "Pressler" can't remember the specs but hopefully it will kick much arse :D