Ok, I just seemed really fast when I was using it. Titles and menu's poped up surprisgly fast...
What OS are you running? Some version of 9.X? I don't know if there a CPU Meter utility for 9, but if you can find one you could see if both processors were being used.
If you want a 604 to run faster try getting a bigger L2 cache. A 512 K is notisable faster than a 256k and a 1 MB is supposedly even better, (yes I know it is stupid wasting time on 604 when a 400 Mhz G3 can be had for 100 bucks or so, but a hobby is not supposed to make sense!
There is support. There's an INIT that'll load, allowing programs that are specifically written for multiple CPUs to use them. The OS itself, however, isn't smart enough to automatically distribute threads across the CPUs like Mac OS X.
I rephrase that then: There is some rudimentary dual CPU support for some very few applications. Total Impact even had some quad boards. But there were 2-3 applications or so that supported SMP in OS 7-8-9 something. Even with top of the line dual 604s CPUs a G3 card will be as fast or faster and then work in all applications.
So while some old OSes and some very few applications will offer dual 604 support it really is outdated in the days of dirt cheap G3 cards
I'm running 9.2.2. I noticed there is a slot I pressume for the L2 Cache inbetween the ram slots. In system profiler it says I have 512KB L2 Cache on the motherboard (The slot in empty right now) . If I add a 1MB stick of cache to that slot inbetween the ram will I have 1.5MB Cache? I only have 128MB's of ram in there, which I plan to up grade to around 768MB's soon, and if I can, just max the thing out.The disk which photoshop is running off of it a 10K 18GB SCSI, I don't know if that will make a difference or not.
I'm running 9.2.2. I noticed there is a slot I pressume for the L2 Cache inbetween the ram slots. In system profiler it says I have 512KB L2 Cache on the motherboard (The slot in empty right now) . If I add a 1MB stick of cache to that slot inbetween the ram will I have 1.5MB Cache? I only have 128MB's of ram in there, which I plan to up grade to around 768MB's soon, and if I can, just max the thing out.The disk which photoshop is running off of it a 10K 18GB SCSI, I don't know if that will make a difference or not.
Is the slot not labelled, as you presume it is for the L2 cache? From all I've seen of cache memory, because it is fast, it is located in one place, as any bus between two components would slow it down.
Don't have any 9600 experience to be able to say what that slot is, but if there is a video connector on the motherboard, it may be video memory.
I'm running 9.2.2. I noticed there is a slot I pressume for the L2 Cache inbetween the ram slots. In system profiler it says I have 512KB L2 Cache on the motherboard (The slot in empty right now) . If I add a 1MB stick of cache to that slot inbetween the ram will I have 1.5MB Cache? I only have 128MB's of ram in there, which I plan to up grade to around 768MB's soon, and if I can, just max the thing out.The disk which photoshop is running off of it a 10K 18GB SCSI, I don't know if that will make a difference or not.
I thought 9.2.2 required a newer computer...obviously not.
First...1MB cache sticks are expensive I think...least they were a year or two ago. Second...768MB of RAM is overkill...I thought that with OS 9...anything over 128, or 256 maybe it was, didn't increase speed anymore, just the number of apps you could RUN.
I would say just save for a new computer. The 50MHz bus should just about kill all hopes you have of making your computer zippy.
Good to see a fellow 604e out there, I have a StarMax 4000/200! I don't use it anymore but it was always a nice computer.
9.2.2 does require a newer computer. I'm running the hack from os9forever.com. It allows me to install 9.2 which has a lot of speed improvments. A 1MB cache dimm is $167. I'm hoping to upgrade my computer to aleast 768MB (ebay is only $138 brand new and life time warrenty. I'm going to stick a G4 800 in there and run OSX. I know the 50Mhz bus will slow down everything, but anything faster than my current setup will be just fine. I'm also going to put a ATA133 card in there and stick two 120GB HD"s. I know it's really not worth upgradeing a old computer. But old macintosh computers just interest me. I'd rather buy old computers than the new G5. I'm weird.
Comments
Originally posted by Altivec_2.0
Will photoshop take advantage of the Dual 200Mhz 604's that I have in my 9600?
According to Adobe's website Photoshop 7 requires a G3, G4, or Dual G4.
Originally posted by Altivec_2.0
Ok, I just seemed really fast when I was using it. Titles and menu's poped up surprisgly fast...
What OS are you running? Some version of 9.X? I don't know if there a CPU Meter utility for 9, but if you can find one you could see if both processors were being used.
If you want a 604 to run faster try getting a bigger L2 cache. A 512 K is notisable faster than a 256k and a 1 MB is supposedly even better, (yes I know it is stupid wasting time on 604 when a 400 Mhz G3 can be had for 100 bucks or so, but a hobby is not supposed to make sense!
Originally posted by DrBoar
AFAIK there is no dual support in 9
There is support. There's an INIT that'll load, allowing programs that are specifically written for multiple CPUs to use them. The OS itself, however, isn't smart enough to automatically distribute threads across the CPUs like Mac OS X.
So while some old OSes and some very few applications will offer dual 604 support it really is outdated in the days of dirt cheap G3 cards
Originally posted by Altivec_2.0
I'm running 9.2.2. I noticed there is a slot I pressume for the L2 Cache inbetween the ram slots. In system profiler it says I have 512KB L2 Cache on the motherboard (The slot in empty right now) . If I add a 1MB stick of cache to that slot inbetween the ram will I have 1.5MB Cache? I only have 128MB's of ram in there, which I plan to up grade to around 768MB's soon, and if I can, just max the thing out.The disk which photoshop is running off of it a 10K 18GB SCSI, I don't know if that will make a difference or not.
Is the slot not labelled, as you presume it is for the L2 cache? From all I've seen of cache memory, because it is fast, it is located in one place, as any bus between two components would slow it down.
Don't have any 9600 experience to be able to say what that slot is, but if there is a video connector on the motherboard, it may be video memory.
Originally posted by Altivec_2.0
I'm running 9.2.2. I noticed there is a slot I pressume for the L2 Cache inbetween the ram slots. In system profiler it says I have 512KB L2 Cache on the motherboard (The slot in empty right now) . If I add a 1MB stick of cache to that slot inbetween the ram will I have 1.5MB Cache? I only have 128MB's of ram in there, which I plan to up grade to around 768MB's soon, and if I can, just max the thing out.The disk which photoshop is running off of it a 10K 18GB SCSI, I don't know if that will make a difference or not.
I thought 9.2.2 required a newer computer...obviously not.
First...1MB cache sticks are expensive I think...least they were a year or two ago. Second...768MB of RAM is overkill...I thought that with OS 9...anything over 128, or 256 maybe it was, didn't increase speed anymore, just the number of apps you could RUN.
I would say just save for a new computer. The 50MHz bus should just about kill all hopes you have of making your computer zippy.
Good to see a fellow 604e out there, I have a StarMax 4000/200! I don't use it anymore but it was always a nice computer.
Beige G3 what I want
G3 800Mhz
512MB Ram
2 Ultra160 18GB drives in Raid O
Gigabit Ethernet
OS X Server
Would be used for a Internet/file server
8600 would be for video import
700Mhz G4
ATA133 One 80GB with 8mb cache
512MB Ram
ATI Orion card w/ATI raedon 128pro
10/100Ethernet PCI Card.
OS X and OS 9.