lkml.org 
[lkml]   [1999]   [Mar]   [15]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
SubjectRe: performance drop with BX mainboard and > 1024 MB
From
Hi Geerten

I think it' s a problem/feature concerning the board. Some time ago Asus has build
boards which weren't able tu support more than 64 MB RAM without loss of
performance.
That time you had to add a chip, the so called TAGRAM, to make the board cache
RAM more than 64 MB. I think the problem still remains on your Soyo-Board. Have a
look at the documentation and look for "cacheable size of memory" or something
similar. If it is limited, the board can't cache the whole RAM and will disable
caching.

Also, the board will often support more memory than caching it (because you can
add the TAGRAM module)...

I think NT gives you always the same performance if you don't go under the minimum
requirements of NT....

I hope, this will help you.

Dietmar

Geerten Schram wrote:

> When running Linux on a BX mainboard with 1024 MB RAM, I've encountered some
> problems. I was wandering if anybody could give me more information or a
> hint towards a solution of my problem. First let me explain what I've tried and
> discovered.
>
> The system we are talking about:
> - SOYO mainboard SY-D6IBA with dual PII 450
> - onboard AIC7880 UW-SCSI controller
> - 4 * 256 MB registered SDRAM
> - 17 GB IBM UW HDD
> - 3COM 905TX 100 Mbit NIC
>
> The problem we've encountered:
>
> --The system (kernel 2.2.2) performed like a 486 with 1024 MB and L2
> cache enabled, both with dual as single processor, but when we disabled the L2
> cache the performance were much better. Just like running with 512MB enabled.
>
> What we've tested:
> - Dual processor with 512MB enabled: OK
> - Single processor with 1024 MB: BAD
> - Single with 512 MB: OK
> - With 513Mb enalbled: BAD
>
> Tested the memory modules on a Asus BX mainboard wtih 768 MB and performance
> were bad (both with the PII450 as with a Celeron with 128 K cache).
>
> Looks like the cache is not sufficient for more then 512 MB. But Intel claims
> that this PII processor must be able to adress up to 4 GB RAM. And also the
> mainboard supports upto 1 GB.
>
> >From another mailinglist we have heard about people that did succesfully run a
> dual PII system on an BX chipset mainboard (Gigabyte: it's probally in the
> name) with 1024 MB RAM.
>
> Can anyone explain to me what is actually happening?
>
> BTW, Windows NT runs without any problem with 1024 MB and L2 cache enabled
> (...). NT really used it's memory and performance dropped a little when
> disabling L2 cache (so I do not suspect funny NT trics...). This is what makes
> me feel that the hardware is correct(...).
>
> According someone from Soyo Europe we are using the latest BIOS.
>
> Regards,
>
> +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-
> Geerten Schram
> LinVision V.o.F.
> +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-
>
> -
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
> Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/






-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:50    [W:0.055 / U:0.320 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site