has anyone tried to put C3 CPU on BP6?

KliK · Post by **KliK** » Mon May 30, 2005 5:33 am

i don't know what kind of pin assembly is present at CPGA S370 C3....maybe they would work without modification on motherboard!

and with only a new BIOS, they would run more than Medocinno Celerons...

KliK · Post by **KliK** » Mon May 30, 2005 5:51 am

note that C3 Smauel2 proc:

- works on 1,6/1,65V;
- has buss speed of 100/133 (can work on 66 also, but don't forget that BP6 works as high as 112MHz bus speed);
- it is available up to 800MHz core speed (best would be 800/100);
- it has 192KB L2 cache compared to 128KB L2 on Celerons;
- has lower heat dicipation, so it means low COOLING (if any is necesary);
- has MMX & 3Dnow! techonlogy in it!
- it's CPGA is compatibile with SPGA & PPGA packages;

KliK · Post by **KliK** » Mon May 30, 2005 6:01 am

file for comparisson...can anyone check the PINs on page 44 of this file?

Billl · Post by **Billl** » Mon May 30, 2005 4:02 pm

I can't figure out why you would want to? Have you ever used a Via chip? I have their 1.2 Gig performance (actual speed 800Mhz) processor. The thing is a dog! My Cellery 366 OC'ed to 550 runs rings around it! It literally does a S.E.T.I. work unit in half the time as the C4. And forget over clocking it. It runs hotter then hell at default speed. Mine is integrated into the Mother Board I bought. That may have something to do with the heat factor. But the performance is still dreadful.

Billl

Wolfram · Post by **Wolfram** » Wed Jun 01, 2005 8:16 am

I agree on the bad performance of the C3. But they are interesting because they need much less power than dual Celerons. Passive cooling shouldn't be an issue.

BUT the newer C3 chips need Tualatin-compatible boards. So I guess they would not work on the BP6.

Billl · Post by **Billl** » Wed Jun 01, 2005 1:36 pm

Wolfram wrote:I agree on the bad performance of the C3. But they are interesting because they need much less power than dual Celerons. Passive cooling shouldn't be an issue.

BUT the newer C3 chips need Tualatin-compatible boards. So I guess they would not work on the BP6.

I still fail to see the point? Want to use less power? Build a 486!

Billl

Wolfram · Post by **Wolfram** » Thu Jun 02, 2005 4:01 am

Billl wrote:
Wolfram wrote:I agree on the bad performance of the C3. But they are interesting because they need much less power than dual Celerons. Passive cooling shouldn't be an issue.

BUT the newer C3 chips need Tualatin-compatible boards. So I guess they would not work on the BP6.
I still fail to see the point? Want to use less power? Build a 486!

Billl

You are right. I guess it's the EPIA platform that attracts most C3 users. Small form factor, current hardware with video acceleration etc.

There must be a reason why there are almost no larger boards for C3 CPUs around. Personally, I used an old socket 370 board and a Celeron 566 (12W max.) for a silent/low-power system. It's only micro-ATX and of course not as, erm, stylish as an EPIA machine. Guess those are more for the "pimp-my-PC"-type of users.