From owner-freebsd-smp Wed Apr 16 15:07:45 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id PAA18102 for smp-outgoing; Wed, 16 Apr 1997 15:07:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: from Ilsa.StevesCafe.com (Ilsa.StevesCafe.com [205.168.119.129]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id PAA18091; Wed, 16 Apr 1997 15:07:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: from Ilsa.StevesCafe.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by Ilsa.StevesCafe.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id QAA18500; Wed, 16 Apr 1997 16:07:29 -0600 (MDT) Message-Id: <199704162207.QAA18500@Ilsa.StevesCafe.com> X-Mailer: exmh version 2.0gamma 1/27/96 From: Steve Passe To: Michael Searle cc: freebsd-hardware@FreeBSD.ORG, smp@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: SMP question. In-reply-to: Your message of "Wed, 16 Apr 1997 20:14:07 -0000." Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Date: Wed, 16 Apr 1997 16:07:28 -0600 Sender: owner-smp@FreeBSD.ORG X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk Hi, > ... > > there is some possibility that the P-90 (I assumme you mean P5-90) will > > be a problem. That vintage of P5 is from the days when the APIC section > > was somewhat unstable, and often required a "matched pair" of CPUs, ie 2 > > from the same stepping and rev level. > > Is this ever necessary for a 2 or 4 P6-150? it is generally believed that this is NOT a problem with any of the P6 chips, but I can't guarantee it. you might also consider trying to clock the P5-150s at 166mHz, the bus will then run @ 66mHz instead of 60mHz. I just purchased a dual P6 with 2 P6-166mHzx512k cache and am successfully running them at 200mHz. -- Steve Passe | powered by smp@csn.net | Symmetric MultiProcessor FreeBSD