It's up to the BIOS to support the higher multipliers that Intel use on the 850+ Mhz processors. The processors have their multipliers locked, but for the BIOS to actually be able to run a 1Ghz Pentium III processor (which has a multiplier of 10.0 with a 100Mhz FSB), it needs to support the multiplier of 10.0, rather than 8.5.
Thanks... I forgot about the different pin assignments on the Tualatin versus the Coppermine Pentium III processors.
I'm personally thinking of going either dual Tualatin (512K version... so long as I find a decent motherboard that supports two of those and doesn't have a Via chipset) or a dual Athlon with the Tyan Tiger MP motherboard. I highly doubt that for what I do that I would need SSE2 or the high memory bandwidth that the Pentium 4 or the Pentium [4] Xeon would have.
I'm not sure if you can install Tualatin processors with a Slotket into a BX board and have it run, but my guess is that someone probably has done it;-)
As far as the board's support for the 1Ghz PIII processor, you may need to flash the BIOS for it to support the higher multipliers (and maybe voltage?). If you haven't checked out Tyan's website, (www.tyan.com, I would check it out and see if they have any more information available about your motherboard and support for higher speed Pentium III processors.
Also, I wanted to clarify that Intel will continue to produce the 256K version of the Tualatin Pentium III, but it will be re-labeled as a Celeron (I don't know if they are going to call it the Celeron III or the Celeron-T or what) and stop orders for the 256K desktop Tualatin either by end of this month or end of this year.
Intel has several different versions of the Tualatin, the 256K cache version for the desktop, and the 512K cache versions, one for the mobile segment and one for the lower-end workstation/server market. The Tualatin processors require a different stepping in the 810 and the 815 chipsets to support the new voltages as well as a new revision of 1.25V GTL versus 1.5V GTL+ used in the original Pentium III processors, which aren't compatible. More information about this can be found in the Pentium III-S Datashet here.
As far as motherboard compatibility, I think Intel didn't want the 512K version of the Tualatin (aka the Pentium III-S) to flow through the retail/desktop channels because in a lot of cases, it performed better than their lower end Pentium 4 processor line. That's also the reason why Intel has slowed/stopped production of Pentium 4 processors below 1.6Ghz and will halt production of the desktop version of the Tualatin and shift the current desktop Tualatin into the Tualatin-based Celeron (but without data pre-fetch and only at 100Mhz FSB). More information can be found at the regular sites: Anandtech, Aces Hardware, Tom's Hardware.
Re:Can you imagine a Beowulf cluster of these?
on
Webpads, Anyone?
·
· Score: 1
Too bad it can't load balance all of the meetings and support calls that I have! Maybe we need BeowulfIT, although Computer Associates may not like the name:)
SPECint2000 Base and SPECfp2000 Base are single-threaded applications and the results only tests one CPU. I'd like to see how well it scales in performance at 32 processors. That thing could be one very powerful Oracle database server or an application server.
Speaking as one of the article writers for this month's issue, I personally don't have the resources nor time to dig into the other BSD operating systems. Also, I focus primarily on FreeBSD since I run FreeBSD on all of my machines that I run and manage (sans my primary work machine, which runs Windows 2000). The only machines that I can install a non-Windows operating system on are usually lower-end machines that don't have a lot of hard drive space (I know hard drive space is cheap, but I'm in debt right now).
Once I'm done with my next two FreeBSD projects for work, then I will try to snag a Mac machine and maybe write an article on Mac OS X 10.1.
If you want to see more general BSD articles or an article on your favorite BSD flavor (be it OpenBSD, NetBSD, Mac OS X 10.x or Darwin), and you have the time to write an article... you are very welcome to submit it to Daemon News. If so, just send a completed article to articles@daemonnews.org
Panasonic/Matsushita Electric have backed both the PD and the DVD-RAM formats for a while, which is why they wouldn't choose a competiting format like DVD-RW or DVD+RW.
According to News.com [http://news.cnet.com/news/0-1006-200-7200873.html ]:
In August, Jobs said the computer maker would not launch any new hardware at the Apple Expo in France. Instead he said his keynote presentation would focus on Mac OS X v10.1, the newest version of the Mac operating system.
I think it will be launched at the next Expo.
Re:staroffice is java based? huh?
on
ZDNet Reviews KOffice
·
· Score: 5, Informative
According to Sun's StarOffice FAQ:
12. Is StarOffice 5.2 software written in the Java language? Will Sun rewrite the StarOffice suite in Java technology?
StarOffice 5.2 software includes components written in the Java language, and provides the Java Virtual Machine for running software based on Java technology. However, the majority of the StarOffice 5.2 code is written in C++. Sun does not intend to rewrite StarOffice 5.2 in Java technology. The Sun Webtop architecture relies heavily on Java technology for the interaction between the browser-enabled client and the application services running on the portal.
The FAQ can be found here: http://www.sun.com/software/star/staroffice/5.2/fa q.html#12
I agree... the FreeBSD project allows anyone to submit a bug report along with the code to fix it. If it's okay'd, then it gets merged into the code (either -STABLE or -CURRENT). For instance, there was a bug in an the rmuser script where it would remove a user, but if for some reason there were two users with the same username (but different capitalization), it would blow both out.
I hunted through the code, found the offending REGEX line in the Perl script (my first actual Perl hack.. hehe) and submitted the change. Within a short period of time (within the week), someone modified the hack and put it in the repository.
I also think that it's not only code that should be more collaborative, but also documentation, man pages, web pages, error codes or messages, etc. Many "open source" projects really need help improving the current documentation base...
(c) Open Source. Recipient's license rights to the Software are conditioned upon Recipient (i) not distributing such Software, in whole or in part, in conjunction with Potentially Viral Software (as defined below); and (ii) not using Potentially Viral Software (e.g. tools) to develop Recipient software which includes the Software, in whole or in part. For purposes of the foregoing, "Potentially Viral Software" means software which is licensed pursuant to terms that: (x) create, or purport to create, obligations for Microsoft with respect to the Software or (y) grant, or purport to grant, to any third party any rights to or immunities under Microsoft's intellectual property or proprietary rights in the Software. By way of example but not limitation of the foregoing, Recipient shall not distribute the Software, in whole or in part, in conjunction with any Publicly Available Software. "Publicly Available Software" means each of (i) any software that contains, or is derived in any manner (in whole or in part) from, any software that is distributed as free software, open source software (e.g. Linux) or similar licensing or distribution models; and (ii) any software that requires as a condition of use, modification and/or distribution of such software that other software distributed with such software (A) be disclosed or distributed in s ource code form; (B) be licensed for the purpose of making derivative works; or (C) be redistributable at no charge. Publicly Available Software includes, without limitation, software licensed or distributed under any of the following licenses or distribution models, or licenses or distribution models similar to any of the following: (A) GNU's General Public License (GPL) or Lesser/Library GPL (LGPL), (B) The Artistic License (e.g., PERL), (C) the Mozilla Public License, (D) the Netscape Public License, (E) the Sun Community Source License (SCSL), and (F) the Sun Industry Standards License (SISL).
The one thing that 5.0-RELEASE and future 5.x releases will bring is a completely revamped kernel and SMP support. Instead of having one giant central lock, the new SMP code will introducing a scheduler lock and per-CPU idle processes. The SMP project page for FreeBSD can be found at http://people.freebsd.org/~jasone/smp/. It looks very promising... mostly when combined with a dually Athlon (or even a dually Alpha) machine:)
You may want to check out the mailing list archives to see the progress and which CardBus chipsets they support. The mailing list archive page can be found here and the archive search page is here.
There is no way that I can personally bring myself to buy a Pentium 4 right now (not only is the price of the processor too much, but having to purchase Rambus memory in pairs isn't that cheap).
I think the Duron would fare quite better at the mobile market (mostly when they get the die shrink to.13 micron)... heh... they could even call it the Athlon Mobility;-)
I think the Tualatin with 256K cache is a stop-gap measure for Intel to battle against the lower end speed range of the Athlon (both T-Bird and Palimino) and the higher end speed range of the Duron. It's also a way for Intel to re-introduce their 1.13Ghz Pentium III model;-)
I wouldn't mind seeing a dual-processor setup with two 512K Tualatin processors... of course that would endanger the 256K Pentium III Xeon workstation market share...
I agree... Intel is causing mixed thoughts and emotions about the Pentium 4, and now the new Pentium III. Intel was supposed to use the Pentium 4 with the Brookdale SDR/DDR SDRAM to aim at the lower end of the mainstream and the high-end of the economical market. The new Pentium III shows that it can easily hold it's own against the Pentium 4 with RDRAM and would compete within the same range as the Pentium 4 with SDRAM.
With lower-end Pentium 4 machines now around $900 from Dell (not the best machine and includes Windows ME, but fits the targetted audience) and Celeron based machines ranging in the $400-700 price range... that leaves a very tiny slice for the new Pentium III (and even the 1.3Ghz Pentium 4 with 64MB SDRAM).
I know Intel has to battle the AMD Duron processor (since the Duron is definitely able to beat the Celeron senseless and can even bet a 1Ghz Pentium III in many benchmarks)... but positioning two chips at it seems silly to me.
When I got my server at home, I needed something that didn't occupy a lot of space and really didn't need it to be beefy at all. I decided to get a Compaq iPaq desktop, but Compaq only provided Windows 95/98 or Windows NT with it. I got the one with Windows 95, wiped it, and put FreeBSD on it. You can read the little paper on it here.
The reason why the ISO images cannot be made official is that Theo de Raadt has copyrighted the OpenBSD CD-ROM's ISO layout.
Below is a snippet of the OpenBSD FAQ (which can be found here:
3.1.2 - Does OpenBSD provide an ISO image available for download?
You can't. The official OpenBSD CD-ROM layout is copyright Theo de
Raadt, as an incentive for people to buy the CD set. Note that only
the layout is copyrighted, OpenBSD itself is free. Nothing precludes
someone else to just grab OpenBSD and make their own CD.
I personally haven't run into problems with the ServerWorks chipset... but I have only run Windows 2000 and FreeBSD on servers with that particular chipset. I haven't installed Linux onto that kind of server, since the servers that had Linux on them were 440BX based:)
$600 isn't so bad for such a motherboard, mostly when it's geared towards the server/workstation market rather than the consumer/enthuasists market. Dual Pentium III Socket-370 motherboards based on the ServerWorks chipsets (with on-board dual-channel SCSI, Ethernet, integrated ATI Rage video card, ATA/33 or ATA/66) from ASUS and Supermicro run for around $450+ (some even go for well over $550).
It's also not really cheap to make 6 or 8 layer motherboards that are as large as the Tyan motherboard... the number of traces on the motherboard is also quite mind-boggling since you need a lot more traces to connect two processors using the EV6 bus than Intel's GTL+/AGTL+ bus scheme.
Slashdot Mirror
It's up to the BIOS to support the higher multipliers that Intel use on the 850+ Mhz processors. The processors have their multipliers locked, but for the BIOS to actually be able to run a 1Ghz Pentium III processor (which has a multiplier of 10.0 with a 100Mhz FSB), it needs to support the multiplier of 10.0, rather than 8.5.
Thanks... I forgot about the different pin assignments on the Tualatin versus the Coppermine Pentium III processors.
I'm personally thinking of going either dual Tualatin (512K version... so long as I find a decent motherboard that supports two of those and doesn't have a Via chipset) or a dual Athlon with the Tyan Tiger MP motherboard. I highly doubt that for what I do that I would need SSE2 or the high memory bandwidth that the Pentium 4 or the Pentium [4] Xeon would have.
I'm not sure if you can install Tualatin processors with a Slotket into a BX board and have it run, but my guess is that someone probably has done it ;-)
As far as the board's support for the 1Ghz PIII processor, you may need to flash the BIOS for it to support the higher multipliers (and maybe voltage?). If you haven't checked out Tyan's website, (www.tyan.com, I would check it out and see if they have any more information available about your motherboard and support for higher speed Pentium III processors.
Oops... 1s/datashet/datasheet/
Also, I wanted to clarify that Intel will continue to produce the 256K version of the Tualatin Pentium III, but it will be re-labeled as a Celeron (I don't know if they are going to call it the Celeron III or the Celeron-T or what) and stop orders for the 256K desktop Tualatin either by end of this month or end of this year.
Intel has several different versions of the Tualatin, the 256K cache version for the desktop, and the 512K cache versions, one for the mobile segment and one for the lower-end workstation/server market. The Tualatin processors require a different stepping in the 810 and the 815 chipsets to support the new voltages as well as a new revision of 1.25V GTL versus 1.5V GTL+ used in the original Pentium III processors, which aren't compatible. More information about this can be found in the Pentium III-S Datashet here.
As far as motherboard compatibility, I think Intel didn't want the 512K version of the Tualatin (aka the Pentium III-S) to flow through the retail/desktop channels because in a lot of cases, it performed better than their lower end Pentium 4 processor line. That's also the reason why Intel has slowed/stopped production of Pentium 4 processors below 1.6Ghz and will halt production of the desktop version of the Tualatin and shift the current desktop Tualatin into the Tualatin-based Celeron (but without data pre-fetch and only at 100Mhz FSB). More information can be found at the regular sites: Anandtech, Aces Hardware, Tom's Hardware.
Too bad it can't load balance all of the meetings and support calls that I have! Maybe we need BeowulfIT, although Computer Associates may not like the name :)
SPECint2000 Base and SPECfp2000 Base are single-threaded applications and the results only tests one CPU. I'd like to see how well it scales in performance at 32 processors. That thing could be one very powerful Oracle database server or an application server.
Speaking as one of the article writers for this month's issue, I personally don't have the resources nor time to dig into the other BSD operating systems. Also, I focus primarily on FreeBSD since I run FreeBSD on all of my machines that I run and manage (sans my primary work machine, which runs Windows 2000). The only machines that I can install a non-Windows operating system on are usually lower-end machines that don't have a lot of hard drive space (I know hard drive space is cheap, but I'm in debt right now).
Once I'm done with my next two FreeBSD projects for work, then I will try to snag a Mac machine and maybe write an article on Mac OS X 10.1.
If you want to see more general BSD articles or an article on your favorite BSD flavor (be it OpenBSD, NetBSD, Mac OS X 10.x or Darwin), and you have the time to write an article... you are very welcome to submit it to Daemon News. If so, just send a completed article to articles@daemonnews.org
Panasonic/Matsushita Electric have backed both the PD and the DVD-RAM formats for a while, which is why they wouldn't choose a competiting format like DVD-RW or DVD+RW.
According to News.com [http://news.cnet.com/news/0-1006-200-7200873.html ]:
In August, Jobs said the computer maker would not launch any new hardware at the Apple Expo in France. Instead he said his keynote presentation would focus on Mac OS X v10.1, the newest version of the Mac operating system.
I think it will be launched at the next Expo.
According to Sun's StarOffice FAQ:
a q.html#12
12. Is StarOffice 5.2 software written in the Java language? Will Sun rewrite the StarOffice suite in Java technology?
StarOffice 5.2 software includes components written in the Java language, and provides the Java Virtual Machine for running software based on Java technology. However, the majority of the StarOffice 5.2 code is written in C++. Sun does not intend to rewrite StarOffice 5.2 in Java technology. The Sun Webtop architecture relies heavily on Java technology for the interaction between the browser-enabled client and the application services running on the portal.
The FAQ can be found here: http://www.sun.com/software/star/staroffice/5.2/f
I agree... the FreeBSD project allows anyone to submit a bug report along with the code to fix it. If it's okay'd, then it gets merged into the code (either -STABLE or -CURRENT). For instance, there was a bug in an the rmuser script where it would remove a user, but if for some reason there were two users with the same username (but different capitalization), it would blow both out.
I hunted through the code, found the offending REGEX line in the Perl script (my first actual Perl hack.. hehe) and submitted the change. Within a short period of time (within the week), someone modified the hack and put it in the repository.
I also think that it's not only code that should be more collaborative, but also documentation, man pages, web pages, error codes or messages, etc. Many "open source" projects really need help improving the current documentation base...
Though you don't want to sell a service at a loss and try to make it up in volume (since many of the dot-bombs failed because of that business model).
s/has/have/ in the first sentence.
I was typing out the article submission too fast while working on something else. ugh.
Oops... forgot to include the entire EULA... you can find the EULA here. It might be a bit slow to load though.
(c) Open Source. Recipient's license rights to the Software are conditioned upon Recipient (i) not distributing such Software, in whole or in part, in conjunction with Potentially Viral Software (as defined below); and (ii) not using Potentially Viral Software (e.g. tools) to develop Recipient software which includes the Software, in whole or in part. For purposes of the foregoing, "Potentially Viral Software" means software which is licensed pursuant to terms that: (x) create, or purport to create, obligations for Microsoft with respect to the Software or (y) grant, or purport to grant, to any third party any rights to or immunities under Microsoft's intellectual property or proprietary rights in the Software. By way of example but not limitation of the foregoing, Recipient shall not distribute the Software, in whole or in part, in conjunction with any Publicly Available Software. "Publicly Available Software" means each of (i) any software that contains, or is derived in any manner (in whole or in part) from, any software that is distributed as free software, open source software (e.g. Linux) or similar licensing or distribution models; and (ii) any software that requires as a condition of use, modification and/or distribution of such software that other software distributed with such software (A) be disclosed or distributed in s ource code form; (B) be licensed for the purpose of making derivative works; or (C) be redistributable at no charge. Publicly Available Software includes, without limitation, software licensed or distributed under any of the following licenses or distribution models, or licenses or distribution models similar to any of the following: (A) GNU's General Public License (GPL) or Lesser/Library GPL (LGPL), (B) The Artistic License (e.g., PERL), (C) the Mozilla Public License, (D) the Netscape Public License, (E) the Sun Community Source License (SCSL), and (F) the Sun Industry Standards License (SISL).
The one thing that 5.0-RELEASE and future 5.x releases will bring is a completely revamped kernel and SMP support. Instead of having one giant central lock, the new SMP code will introducing a scheduler lock and per-CPU idle processes. The SMP project page for FreeBSD can be found at http://people.freebsd.org/~jasone/smp/. It looks very promising... mostly when combined with a dually Athlon (or even a dually Alpha) machine :)
I believe 5.0-RELEASE will have CardBus support.
You may want to check out the mailing list archives to see the progress and which CardBus chipsets they support. The mailing list archive page can be found here and the archive search page is here.
There is no way that I can personally bring myself to buy a Pentium 4 right now (not only is the price of the processor too much, but having to purchase Rambus memory in pairs isn't that cheap).
.13 micron)... heh... they could even call it the Athlon Mobility ;-)
I think the Duron would fare quite better at the mobile market (mostly when they get the die shrink to
I think the Tualatin with 256K cache is a stop-gap measure for Intel to battle against the lower end speed range of the Athlon (both T-Bird and Palimino) and the higher end speed range of the Duron. It's also a way for Intel to re-introduce their 1.13Ghz Pentium III model ;-)
I wouldn't mind seeing a dual-processor setup with two 512K Tualatin processors... of course that would endanger the 256K Pentium III Xeon workstation market share...
I agree... Intel is causing mixed thoughts and emotions about the Pentium 4, and now the new Pentium III. Intel was supposed to use the Pentium 4 with the Brookdale SDR/DDR SDRAM to aim at the lower end of the mainstream and the high-end of the economical market. The new Pentium III shows that it can easily hold it's own against the Pentium 4 with RDRAM and would compete within the same range as the Pentium 4 with SDRAM.
With lower-end Pentium 4 machines now around $900 from Dell (not the best machine and includes Windows ME, but fits the targetted audience) and Celeron based machines ranging in the $400-700 price range... that leaves a very tiny slice for the new Pentium III (and even the 1.3Ghz Pentium 4 with 64MB SDRAM).
I know Intel has to battle the AMD Duron processor (since the Duron is definitely able to beat the Celeron senseless and can even bet a 1Ghz Pentium III in many benchmarks)... but positioning two chips at it seems silly to me.
When I got my server at home, I needed something that didn't occupy a lot of space and really didn't need it to be beefy at all. I decided to get a Compaq iPaq desktop, but Compaq only provided Windows 95/98 or Windows NT with it. I got the one with Windows 95, wiped it, and put FreeBSD on it. You can read the little paper on it here.
The reason why the ISO images cannot be made official is that Theo de Raadt has copyrighted the OpenBSD CD-ROM's ISO layout.
Below is a snippet of the OpenBSD FAQ (which can be found here:
3.1.2 - Does OpenBSD provide an ISO image available for download? You can't. The official OpenBSD CD-ROM layout is copyright Theo de Raadt, as an incentive for people to buy the CD set. Note that only the layout is copyrighted, OpenBSD itself is free. Nothing precludes someone else to just grab OpenBSD and make their own CD.
I personally haven't run into problems with the ServerWorks chipset... but I have only run Windows 2000 and FreeBSD on servers with that particular chipset. I haven't installed Linux onto that kind of server, since the servers that had Linux on them were 440BX based :)
$600 isn't so bad for such a motherboard, mostly when it's geared towards the server/workstation market rather than the consumer/enthuasists market. Dual Pentium III Socket-370 motherboards based on the ServerWorks chipsets (with on-board dual-channel SCSI, Ethernet, integrated ATI Rage video card, ATA/33 or ATA/66) from ASUS and Supermicro run for around $450+ (some even go for well over $550).
It's also not really cheap to make 6 or 8 layer motherboards that are as large as the Tyan motherboard... the number of traces on the motherboard is also quite mind-boggling since you need a lot more traces to connect two processors using the EV6 bus than Intel's GTL+/AGTL+ bus scheme.