Results 1 to 10 of 10
  1. #1
    Guest

    Question

    Before the site went down, someone posted a message about a utility for changing the divisor on the L2 cache for Athlon processors. The utility changed a value in your bios.

    I have two questions.
    1. where is this utility again?
    2. If you change your bios and the setting doesn't work, i.e. your system won't bootup, how do you get your system back?

    Thanks,

    - bones

  2. #2
    Guest

    Post

    If you have a K7V, then there's a utility at
    www.tweakfiles.com

    that fits the bill. Hope that's what you are looking for.

  3. #3
    Guest

  4. #4
    Guest

    Question

    No one has yet answered my 2nd question. What if I change the L2 cache divisor in my bios and then my system won't boot? How would I get may system back?

    Or do I not have to worry about my system not booting up with the L2 cache divisor change?

    Thanks, in advance, for your help.

    - bones

  5. #5
    Guest

    Post

    <BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>2. If you change your bios and the setting doesn't work, i.e. your system won't bootup, how do you get your system back?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

    Well, it depends.

    What are your spec's? Do you have a GDF device?
    Lets start with what the defaults are:
    K7 500 - 700 L2=1/2*
    K7 700 - 850 L2=2/5*
    K7 850 - 1000 L2=1/3*

    *denotes "DON"T QUOTE ME"...
    So, if you have an 850 and no mobo with FSB options or a GDF device and you flash your bios with the L2 set to 1/2 IT WON'T BOOT!
    You have some options. 1. Find someone with a K7 500-700 chip. 2. Set you mobo FSB to its lowest bus speed IE: 8.5x90=765MHz. 3. Use a GDF device and set it to 5x or 6x.

    Its safe to say any AMD K7 xxx will run at L2=1/3. Then narrowing down the field is the L2=2/5 for say up to 850/875. Finally, L2=1/2 for up to 650/699.

    One last option if all others are not available is to Hotswap the bios in another mobo with a new flash.

    ---
    My Tests:
    K7 500 with GDF and Asus K7M 113x6.5=735 L2=1/2
    same as above with L2=2/5 is 110x7=770
    I could go no higher even with L2=1/3 but better cooling who knows.
    K7 650 with GDF and Asus K7V 107x7=750 L2=1/2
    same as abover with L2=2/5 is 120x7=840
    With the L2=1/3 I could reach 110x8=880 but the memory only ran at 100MHz.


    ------------------
    ---
    tb

    [This message has been edited by teebee (edited 05-15-2000).]

  6. #6
    Guest

    Post

    Deja Vu or the Matrix?

    Since "I" can't delete a duplicate message of what I sent I'll just waste this space with ASCII gibberish:
    --->>!@$%^$#!$@$&^!@GHFGH!@E!BVCS$@$#!UFS!@%^$#!@DWTY!RW!@W!@W
    ";.NSO@#!E(*fdDSsrefA
    Now I feel better...

    Later~

    [This message has been edited by teebee (edited 05-15-2000).]

    [This message has been edited by teebee (edited 05-15-2000).]

  7. #7
    Guest

    Post

    Echo~

    [This message has been edited by teebee (edited 05-16-2000).]

  8. #8
    Guest

    Post

    Thanks tb.

    I have been considering increasing the speed of my cache rather than overclocking my cpu MHz rate.

    I had an interesting experience at work where I was performance tuning some assembly language code. What I found is that the cache make all the difference in the world. A large percentage of a program's instructions read or write memory. If that memory is not in cache, it doesn't matter how fast your CPU is the speed of that instruction will be based upon your memory performance.

    So I am not sure how much real world benefit people get when the oc their Athlon but then have to lower the L2 cache rate.

    - bones

  9. #9
    Guest

    Post

    So true Bones but if you can make your system (CPU, BUS, MEMORY) overclock, won't the memory more than make up for the lack of cache? I've reached the new and undocumented bus speed of 133MHz and with my multiplier at 7 I get 800MHz with cache at 2/5 for my K7V but the memory is at least 150MHz.

    ------------------
    ---
    tb

  10. #10
    Guest

    Post

    Tb, thanks for reminding me this. You are right. If you overclock your fsb, you should get faster memory speeds as well.

    I understand that many people are using Gold Fingers Devices (FGD's) to overclock the CPU. When GFD's are used I believe, the fsp speed remains the same. So if one uses a GFD to overclock the CPU but has to reduce the speed of the cache to get it to work, the result might even be slower real-world performance.

    FYI in my performance enhancements I did at work, I discovered many instructions take 10-20 times longer to execute with cache misses on a Pentium 133. One instruction was over 100 slower when the cache was flushed. I suspect this situation is even worse on today's faster machines.

    Thanks for the dialog,

    - bones

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •