From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Jan 3 02:38:06 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B9A6116A419 for ; Thu, 3 Jan 2008 02:38:06 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from chris@chrismaness.com) Received: from ns1.kq6up.org (adsl-76-238-148-145.dsl.irvnca.sbcglobal.net [76.238.148.145]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7A09813C447 for ; Thu, 3 Jan 2008 02:38:06 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from chris@chrismaness.com) Received: from [192.168.1.2] ([192.168.1.2]) by ns1.kq6up.org (8.13.8/8.13.6) with ESMTP id m032c4H9002743; Wed, 2 Jan 2008 18:38:06 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from chris@chrismaness.com) Message-ID: <477C4A87.2080805@chrismaness.com> Date: Wed, 02 Jan 2008 18:37:59 -0800 From: Chris Maness User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.9 (Windows/20071031) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Erik Trulsson References: <477AF4F3.1040703@chrismaness.com> <477C283E.9070705@gmail.com> <20080103002330.GA29534@owl.midgard.homeip.net> In-Reply-To: <20080103002330.GA29534@owl.midgard.homeip.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: pIII coppermine? X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 03 Jan 2008 02:38:06 -0000 Erik Trulsson wrote: > On Wed, Jan 02, 2008 at 07:11:42PM -0500, Rob wrote: > >> Chris Maness wrote: >> >>> I have an ABIT VP6 dual socket that I want to use as my FreeBSD server. I >>> only have one CPU installed, and I was told that if I were to add another >>> CPU that the serial numbers of the CPU had to be sequential. Is this >>> true? I see these processors on e-bay for $7 it would be nice to >>> >> I assume you mean "BP6". >> > > Why? The Abit BP6 and Abit VP6 both exist, and are two different > motherboards, with the VP6 being newer and supporting faster CPUs. > > I see no reason to not believe he did mean "VP6". > > > > >> It's best that they be the same "stepping" >> number; this is like an engineering revision level in Intelese. Usually >> looks like "SLQ7" or similar. But it wasn't required on those boards. Of >> course Intel never sanctioned Dual Celerons, which is what made it so cool >> :) I still have one of those with very low hours that I keep thinking I >> should dust off and recommission for sumpthin'. >> >> I hope you're not using this machine for any critical applications. All >> the ABIT boards of that day (circa 1999) had really low quality >> electrolytic capacitors in the voltage regulators that are notorious for >> failing. And the BP6 had one cap that got a totally wrong value installed >> on the board. Google BP6 capacitors and you'll find lots. Also www.BP6.com >> Have fun. >> > > Both the BP6 and VP6 have a reputation for bad capacitors (the VP6 even more > so than the BP6.) > > > > I built the machine in 2000 and used it with no problems all the way up to 2005. I lucked out. It just so happens they have the same "stepping" number, so they should work perfect together. I am going to be using it as a file server/backup server. If it runs stable, I might make it my main server, because with both processors running it will be better than the other oldie I have as my main server. I used the VP6 as my main desktop for 5 years before Photoshop got too bloated to run fast enough for my photography business. If something was going to give as far as the caps on the board, would they still be a high risk if the board has been very reliable thus far? I just use the main server to host a couple of small traffic web sites from my house. It has been running fine for almost 8 years, and I only recently added a hard drive as a precaution. Thanks, -- Chris Maness (909) 223-9179 http://www.chrismaness.com