tusl2-c/ pentium III tualatin with 512k of L2 cache

PC Configurations, motherboards, etc, etc

Moderators: valis, garyb

Post Reply
User avatar
alfonso
Posts: 2225
Joined: Sun Mar 25, 2001 4:00 pm
Location: Fregene.
Contact:

Post by alfonso »

hello dear pulsarians.
do you know if asus tusl2-c can work with the pentium III tualatin with 512k of L2 cache?
i ask this because there are strange infos on that thing.
a test i saw on a tech site linked on a post somewere in planetz (i don't remember the site nor the post) was talking of such a combination, but in the asus site faq section for the tusl2c is said that the pentiumIII-s (shuld be the 512k L2cache tualatin)is not supported.
please, if you have infos....
thanks, alfonso.
ontik
Posts: 149
Joined: Mon Oct 29, 2001 4:00 pm
Location: Me Mum's Moot? Where u from? (Australia)

Post by ontik »

I'm not too sure but I have the PIII 1.2Ghz hcip with the standard cache that I purchsed only because fo the cost of the 512k item.

Having said that, my technician was recommending the combo to me and I have the TUSL2C mobo.

I know this is not much but since no-one else was talking to you..... :wink:
User avatar
alfonso
Posts: 2225
Joined: Sun Mar 25, 2001 4:00 pm
Location: Fregene.
Contact:

Post by alfonso »

thanks for answering.
was he recommending the 512k or the 256k ?
alfonso.
User avatar
at0m
Posts: 4743
Joined: Sat Jun 30, 2001 4:00 pm
Location: Bubble Metropolis
Contact:

Post by at0m »

Hi.

L2 cache is most important for floating point operations. I wrote "floating point", read "audio applications".

this is also why the Celeron was a real bad audio performer. It was a cheap line cpu, in initial stage released with no L2 cache.

atom.
subhuman
Posts: 2573
Joined: Thu Mar 29, 2001 4:00 pm
Location: Galaxy Inside

Post by subhuman »

I think it will, but I'm not positive. I suggested to someone on the CW forum a few months back to try it if his dealer would let him return it if it didn't work - he said there, that it worked great and he noticed the improvement!

So I guess my advice is the same, since I haven't seen it first hand ... see if you can try it & have a nice return policy if it doesn't work :smile:
User avatar
at0m
Posts: 4743
Joined: Sat Jun 30, 2001 4:00 pm
Location: Bubble Metropolis
Contact:

Post by at0m »

Nice advice, cos there's so many different (and some less documented) modifications to motherboards, I found both my Acorp and MSI mobo's with undocumented neat extra's. MSI has ATA100 instead of ATA66, both have detailed BIOS.
So it is tricky to go to the shop and get a 512kb cpu. L2 cache is very expensive, and might be incompatible with your deck. You could have an pre-release, or an updated version of your motherboard. Go for an agreement, like Subhuman mentioned above.
User avatar
alfonso
Posts: 2225
Joined: Sun Mar 25, 2001 4:00 pm
Location: Fregene.
Contact:

Post by alfonso »

hey pulsarian friends,
do you think that on tusl2-c i should avoid to mount my adaptec 2940 u2w, just relying on ata 100 for audio, gaining pci channels for masterverbs etc.?
considering the board's architecture....
Micha
Posts: 471
Joined: Tue May 08, 2001 4:00 pm
Location: Berlin
Contact:

Post by Micha »

yes. I use 2940uw with my cusl2-c. No problem. But the SCSI eats up bandwidth. Reduced usage down to CDWriter. I wait for affordable ATAPI DVDWriter + then bye, bye 2940.
Micha
User avatar
alfonso
Posts: 2225
Joined: Sun Mar 25, 2001 4:00 pm
Location: Fregene.
Contact:

Post by alfonso »

thanks for all answers.
concerning the 512k question, a dealer i called told me he had build such a machine for a customer and all was ok. i think i'll move soon.
cheers, alfonso.
marcuspocus
Posts: 2310
Joined: Sun Mar 25, 2001 4:00 pm
Location: Canada/France

Post by marcuspocus »

Hi, i also got 2940U2W, and i use it only for cdr, cdrw and DVD. HD is on ATA100... Always usefull keep a scsi card close, for reading AKAI HD or EMU HD directly... faster than copying those on cd!
User avatar
at0m
Posts: 4743
Joined: Sat Jun 30, 2001 4:00 pm
Location: Bubble Metropolis
Contact:

Post by at0m »

oops

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: atomic on 2002-02-21 05:16 ]</font>
Post Reply