PDA

View Full Version : Is this a good computer? i have questions!



nehalmistry
9th May 2001, 21:09
i got a socket 370 m754lmr mobo by pcchips.... my first question is ... is pcchips a good company? are their mobo's good?

the second question is i'm 99% sure im getting a celeron 700 and my mobo manual said it supports PPGA Celeron FSB 66mhz ..... now will it support 100mhz because the multiplier only goes up to 8 and therefore i can't clock it to 700 with 66fsb....

it's pretty good i think.... it has a onboard agp TNT2 with max shared mem of 32megs... which means im gonna become an nvidiot http://forums.murc.ws/ubb/smile.gif but you gotta admit it kicks g200's ass... well, its a generation ahead... sound is CMI onboard, but i can get a good ol' SB PCI128....

btw, the celeron 700 is gonna cost me $125 CDN... .... which is ~$83 US...

here is website
http://www.pcchips.com.tw/M754LMR.html

all opinions are appreciated....

EDIT: it is 4x agp i think.....

------------------
Asus P5A-B MoBo w/AMD K6-266@300 (100mhz FSB)
Matrox Milleniumm G200 AGP (oh, lets party)
Creative SB Awe32 (a classic, superb card)
Realtek 8029A NIC Card
128meg (2x64) 100mhz SDRam
Ali V agp chipset (2x)
30 gig HD 7200 RPM UDMA 66
ALI 1543 IDE Controller (ATA 33)
Optiquest Q53 15" Monitor
Actima 36X CD-Rom
Slackware Linux 7.1
Windows 95B (for gaming)
ICQ UIN: 24730025

[This message has been edited by nehalmistry (edited 10 May 2001).]

Rags
9th May 2001, 21:15
PCCHIPS==GARBAGE MAXIMUS!!

Rags

dsp
9th May 2001, 21:18
nehalmistry,

Personally I don't especially like PCchips/Houston Tech motherboards. But for a highly integrated board they are very nice.

About the Celeron 700, it should work as the CPU automatically tells the motherboard its needed info, and since it supports Coppermines it very well should support the Celermine 700 (10.5 Multiplier). If nothing else check for a new BIOS which should support it. Hope this helps.

dsp

------------------
AMD Duron 650@900MHz
256MB Micron PC-133 CAS3 -7E @ 137MHz CAS2
ABIT KT7-RAID
13.6GB Maxtor 7200RPM Hard Drive
8.4GB Quantum CR
20 GB Quantum LM
Toshiba SD-M1212 6X DVD ROM
Plextor 8/4/32A
SB Live X-Gamer 5.1
Matrox G400 32MB Dualhead Vanilla @ 150/200/150
Zoltrix TV-MAX Capture Card (BT848)
17" Hansol 710P
Win 98SE/Win2kPro
10/100 Ethernet card (D-Link)
Cable @Home
Microsoft Intellimouse Explorer

Rags
9th May 2001, 21:23
<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" size="2">Personally I don't especially like PCchips/Houston Tech motherboards. But for a highly integrated board they are very nice. </font>
Yeah, if you don't need quality, stability, and support.

Stay far, far away from anything PCCHIPS. Stick with the name brand stuff. Asus, Aopen, Abit, MSI, Intel.

Rags

nehalmistry
9th May 2001, 21:25
darn, i knew i would get bad comments about pcchips... http://forums.murc.ws/ubb/frown.gif ... anyway..... it wont suddenly f**k up my computer parts... at the minimum it will work... right?

dsp
9th May 2001, 21:34
Rags,

I know about the stability I had an old Super 7 board and the memory traces were broken I think. I've worked with other versions of the board (stupid school policy) and they work fairly well, but I agree name brand is better.

Nehalmistry,

About the Celeron 700, check page 31 of the manual, it mentions CPU PNP allowing you to change the multiplier. Also I notice that leaving all the jumpers open is not documented (for the multiplier) so that might be something to look at.

The board shouldn't screw up your parts, if anything it alone should go.

dsp

[This message has been edited by dsp (edited 10 May 2001).]

sasa
10th May 2001, 03:17
Stay away from PC CHIPS!!! Their MB are THE WORST you can buy. Dont buy it no matter how low the price is. Anyone who says different is stupid. Once I made comp with PC Chips MB and I was forced to look how it works for a whole year. I can not believe how their MB even got the permission to enter market.
You have celery 700? cool, but be warned that your system will be im most cases slower then celery 500 with decent MB. If your game will run long enough to measure speed...

SteveC
10th May 2001, 03:30
Ugh! PCChips - we've built a few machines using these boards... once in a blue moon they release a stable model, but stable at the tradeoff of being very poor performers.

(edit: OK, so I read their site, and answer my own questions )

It is a TNT2, so that's not too bad. However, it's made by Ali, and I've personally never been impressed by them.

Also, get the SB128 if you can - the CMI sound Pro things aren't very compatible for games.

If you can, take the board back and save up a touch more and get another make - or see if you can get a 2nd hand board. If not, don't worry - at least it's not a SiS based board, like most of PCChip's stuff. It'll probably all work, jut not as fast as another make of board.

good luck!

------------------
Cheers,
Steve

"Life is what we make of it, yet most of us just fake"

[This message has been edited by SteveC (edited 10 May 2001).]

The PIT
10th May 2001, 03:34
Yep PCChips ought to be renamed Pcshits. There crap, so crap they even made the pages of pcplus mag.

nehalmistry
10th May 2001, 06:46
damn you guys...... damn..... should i return it and get my $0 refund?

you really dissapointed me, but i guess i should know how shitty pcshits is....

well i'm not getting my celeron... someone else is....should be here tonite... if it doesnt work out... i'll get a new mobo..... but anyway.... at least i can try this out... right? i mean i'm not planning to do anything special like o'c it.... as long as i keep it to its limits.... i think i should be fine

Technoid
10th May 2001, 09:01
Q. What's Worse than a PCChips Mobo?

A: A PCChips mobo with VIA Chips! http://forums.murc.ws/ubb/biggrin.gif

The PIT
10th May 2001, 09:49
Via on pcshits god thats the ulimate shit.
Not even a black hole could swallow that.

Nuno
10th May 2001, 09:54
I really canīt understand this primary "IT SUCKS, MAN" reflex. Let me ask you all bashing pcchips how many of you actually tested these motherboards?

Look, Iīve owned a pcchips board and tried another. The first one had a ALI chipset (more or less like intel TX), and my p225MMX is still running after 4 years, and it performed on par with Intel chipsets at the time. It even had assyncronous memory/bus speeds, so you could run the fsb at 83 mhz with the pci within spec.

The second pcchips mobo Iīve tried had a KT133 chipset and it was merely to troubleshoot another board. I didnīt keep it, but it actually let win2k to install, and my usb scanner worked with it, and thatīs more than I can say about the Lucky-Star and the Abit KT7-raid, accordingly. I ended getting a Asus A7V.

So, nehalmistry, try the damn thing. If it works and if it fits your needs, what the heck.

[This message has been edited by Nuno (edited 10 May 2001).]

Rags
10th May 2001, 10:19
<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" size="2">Originally posted by Nuno:
I really canīt understand this primary "IT SUCKS, MAN" reflex. Let me ask you all bashing pcchips how many of you actually tested these motherboards?

Look, Iīve owned a pcchips board and tried another. The first one had a ALI chipset (more or less like intel TX), and my p225MMX is still running after 4 years, and it performed on par with Intel chipsets at the time. It even had assyncronous memory/bus speeds, so you could run the fsb at 83 mhz with the pci within spec.

The second pcchips mobo Iīve tried had a KT133 chipset and it was merely to troubleshoot another board. I didnīt keep it, but it actually let win2k to install, and my usb scanner worked with it, and thatīs more than I can say about the Lucky-Star and the Abit KT7-raid, accordingly. I ended getting a Asus A7V.

So, nehalmistry, try the damn thing. If it works and if it fits your needs, what the heck.

[This message has been edited by Nuno (edited 10 May 2001).]</font>

Don't open your mouth too soon. Many of us here, including me, have to work on systems that are based on PCCHIPS motherboards. The general agreement is that there is not a lower form of motherboard manufacturer.

Rags

Technoid
10th May 2001, 10:19
<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" size="2">Originally posted by The PIT:
Via on pcshits god thats the ulimate shit.
Not even a black hole could swallow that.</font>


I thought that that would be the general consensus. http://forums.murc.ws/ubb/biggrin.gif

Alec
10th May 2001, 10:29
I also have a bad image of PCChips, cause a friend of mine had a few problems with one of their boards... he had a (not integrated) TNT2, also - which may kick G200īs butt in 3D speed but looks like crap, even in 2D. Anyway, it performed badly even after the problems were resolved. He has a 433 Celeron like me, but my system is noticeably faster. We tried Colin Mcrae 2 and my system was clearly faster with my old 8Mb Mystique G200. Thatīs all I can say of PCChips.

Anyway, if I were you, Iīd kill myself (just kidding), I would wait, try it, maybe a few benchmarks for reference, compare them - if itīs stable and performs fairly well - why should you worry?

[This message has been edited by Alec (edited 10 May 2001).]

Novdid
10th May 2001, 11:18
0$

Looks like a hell of a bargain, if itīs stable that is. http://forums.murc.ws/ubb/smile.gif

nehalmistry
10th May 2001, 12:19
all you guys are saying its crap, it's not stable.... can you please give me some examples of what effects it has... eg.. does it suddenly freeze? i need some actual feedback... what is ur definition of not stable... what does it specifically do wrong,...

Liquid Snake
10th May 2001, 12:53
Well, I have a fried PCChips M598...

Well, you could give it a try. As Steve said, once in a while, they do release a somewhat stable board.

[This message has been edited by Liquid Snake (edited 10 May 2001).]

Nuno
10th May 2001, 15:08
Rags, I know it, and for some reason I didnīt kept the board, right? My personal opinion is that, generally speaking, you are better served with brand-name motherboards, specially when support is concerned.

What I find very interesting is that in ANY message board remotely related with hardware you canīt even mention "pcchips" name, people just start saying the worst things.

Now:
- Itīs a value OEM brand
- Their products are not targeted to hardware entusiasts
- They must have a high RMA rate, but then again so has ABIT
- There must be millions of pcchips motherboards around the world
- I donīt think anybody manufactured defective hardware on purpose
- I donīt belive every single one of it is defective, giving trouble or failing, because I think they would have gone out of business by now
- Yes I heard about the fake cache chips story. http://forums.murc.ws/ubb/smile.gif

Nuno
10th May 2001, 15:21
Rags, I know it, and for some reason I didnīt kept the board, right? My personal opinion is that, generally speaking, you are better served with brand-name motherboards, specially when support is concerned.

What I find very interesting is that in ANY message board remotely related with hardware you canīt even mention "pcchips" name, people just start saying the worst things.

Now:
- Itīs a value OEM brand
- Their products are not targeted to hardware entusiasts
- They must have a high RMA rate, but then again so has ABIT
- There must be millions of pcchips motherboards around the world
- I donīt think anybody manufactured defective hardware on purpose
- I donīt belive every single one of it is defective, giving trouble or failing, because I think they would have gone out of business by now
- Yes I heard about the fake cache chips story. http://forums.murc.ws/ubb/smile.gif

Le Bodge
10th May 2001, 16:36
Hee Hee.

I hate it when you guys sit on the fence!

------------------


[This message has been edited by Le Bodge (edited 10 May 2001).]

xortam
11th May 2001, 08:49
V

DentyCracker
11th May 2001, 12:38
Ok speaking from personal very recent experience with pcchips mobos. Within the last month I installed 3 pcchips mobos, I 756, and two 754s. The 756 is a better board in my opinion. Runs WinMe with no problems at all, with a 666 Celeron (ok 667). The two 754s have been problematic to say the least, one more so than the other. They both have Celeron 700s in them and one of them I only got it stable by ghosting a drive with 98se and then upgrading it to Me. It is more or less stable now with Me but genome renders it unstable. The other one is a basket case and likes to run hot at > 40deg. C even after the removal of the crappy thermal pad and application of arctic silver. It runs stable if I turn the AC to max so it is a definite problem. It may be that the HSF is not tight to the socket, it which case I figure it is the mobo's fault, as the HSF is the retail Intel hsf. Unstable as to be unusable in win95, win98, win98se, winMe, and win2kpro, when not under heavy AC with ambient T of < 20 deg C.

PCChips makes a few good boards, the 754 is not one of them.


Addendum
That "TNT2" is a poor implementation, or the fact that it is using system memory hurts its performance. It is nothing like a real TNT2, nowhere near as fast as my G400, or my G200 for that matter (in Fifa2000 at least). Try it out but I'm pretty sure you will be disappointed. BTW, I rate ALi lower than VIA any day. The 756 is a lower performing board in my opinion but far stabler. Those comments by people using PCCHips mobos are spot on. The TXProII was a good board to put a Pentium 233 MMX in, (M571), I have just set up our own with win2k Server to basically be the dedicated server on our home network

PS I've ordered a PAL6035 for it.

[This message has been edited by DentyCracker (edited 11 May 2001).]

nehalmistry
14th May 2001, 23:47
I GOT IT QUESTIONS QUESTIONS QUESTIONS

you guys said it would either be low stability or low performance... this one is stable as hell.... but slow...

and boy was i dissapointed... can you guys help me.... when the tnt2 is spitting out at 1024 at high refresh rate..... the screen is noticeable fuzzy....

and in gaming... the speed is crap... its very constant.... but still not that great.... max is 34 fps... then it can suddenly drop to 17fps, then sometimes 13fps... but NEVER in between.. this is in half-life 640x480 opengl. u guys are MU's but if someone can help me out.. that would be nice... also.. the default drivers from nvidia didnt work and i had to use these speciality drivers... should i try getting the nvidia one's working?...

barely better than my old specs... boy you guys were right.....

should i try putting it to 100 FSB... its at 66 right now....? will it fry chip?

PS.. its a celeron II copermine128



[This message has been edited by nehalmistry (edited 15 May 2001).]

az
15th May 2001, 01:12
You're running your monitor at 70 KHz refresh rate, with VSynic=On (actually it's more like 68 or 69 KHz, divided by two that's 34.x, divided by four it's 17.x, and divided by five it's 13.x KHz). This behaviour is normal since the framerates are synced to your video signals, so if you WOULD be getting 33 FPS with VSync=Off, you only get the nearest divisor of your refresh rate, which to me would seem to be 69/3=23. When you complain about the overall slowness, that's due to your video chip using part of the system memory, so both won't get the whole speed of the RAM. Image quality is also an issue since this is a low-cost solution, sorry to tell you that. IF you happen to have an AGP slot and some money left, buy a seperate AGP card, even a TNT2 would be faster than yours now, though TNT2's aren't really known for their great picture quality (in fact, the opposite is the case), so thinking about buying a matrox card (or even a newer nVidia or 3DFx card) would certainly help both performance and image quality. And I mean overall performance (will likely rise a little bit, but don't expect too much), not only game performance (will rise depending on the video card you buy).

AZ

P.S.: I'm not too sure with VSync here, can someone please come and confirm I don't kno §h|te? http://forums.murc.ws/ubb/wink.gif

rugger
15th May 2001, 02:07
> Now:
> - Itīs a value OEM brand

Only OEM's are prepared to do basic QA for PCCHIPS. They must return them by the dozen. I guess that is why they are so cheap.

> - Their products are not targeted to hardware entusiasts

Neither are matrox's apparently, but matrox does make high quality products. Aopen caters to OEMs as well, but they also do high quality boards.

> - They must have a high RMA rate, but then again so has ABIT

But ABIT at least can design a board that is fast.

> - There must be millions of pcchips motherboards around the world

There are also millions of really crappy, fragile, useless kitchen utilities out there too, so what is your point. They somehow sell, so there is no suprise PCCHIPS manages to sell some boards.

> - I donīt think anybody manufactured defective hardware on purpose

They don't have to want to make defective hardware on purpose, they simply put no effort into QA (quality assurance), which is very bad for your reputation, and results in very bad products.

> - I donīt belive every single one of it is defective, giving trouble or failing, because I think they would have gone out of business by now

Neither are all those realtek network cards. Doesn't mean they are any good (I have a few, they work but are still fairly crappy)
Just very cheap.

> - Yes I heard about the fake cache chips story.

Another case of absoutely rediculous Quality Assurance.

Designing and creating computer hardware is not a simple buisness. People who do so simply MUST do a lot of work, esspecially in refining the quality and performance of the products they make. Slapping something together is not enough.

Alec
15th May 2001, 03:50
Donīt buy a TNT 2! Itīs a terrible card... try a Geforce MX or something, if you can afford it.

rugger
15th May 2001, 09:50
I Know the realtek cards can work ok, but the design of them is not to the same level as Intel cards and tulip cards.

I actually have realtek 3 cards (8029) at home here, and used dozens more without problem. They are cheap, have BNC connectors (for my co-axail network) and are PCI. They work fine, don't chew CPU much (only 10mbs).

I know the realtek example was not bery giid, but finding an example that reaches the deplorable depths of pcchips is really hard :-)

xortam
15th May 2001, 11:38
<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" size="2">Originally posted by az:
... I'm not too sure with VSync here, can someone please come and confirm I don't kno §h|te? http://forums.murc.ws/ubb/wink.gif</font>Yes, I can confirm that you don't know §h|te. http://forums.murc.ws/ubb/biggrin.gif

DosFreak
15th May 2001, 13:35
Their right. That mobo is garbage. I wouldn't GIVE that motherboard to my worst enemy. I would sell it tho.... http://forums.murc.ws/ubb/biggrin.gif

That mobo makes S3 look like NVIDIA.

nehalmistry
15th May 2001, 16:13
well.... im justing hating it more and more as i use it.... if i hafta i WILL go back to my K6-1... the chip is crap... but at least everything else is real nice...

anyway, i found a DFI motherboard for a good price.... should i get it? how are DFI? they any good... or as bad as pcchips?

the reason is it has an ISA slot, which saves me from getting a new sound card.... cos the onboard one's suck...

DentyCracker
15th May 2001, 16:17
That mobo has no AGP slot. It is meant to be a cheap business PC. I suspect that I may have a bum PS in the one that is giving more trouble. See, I told you the VideoCard was slow, as it uses system memory. I am not sure you can overclock that machine. The most you can do for graphics is to download the latest AGP driver for that chipset, and the latest driver for the VGA portion of that board. Go to www.pcchips.nl (http://www.pcchips.nl)
it is a much better website than the Taiwanese one and MUCH faster

[This message has been edited by DentyCracker (edited 15 May 2001).]

Rags
15th May 2001, 16:20
DFI's are generally better than PCCHIPS, but I would still stray from them if possible.

Rags

DentyCracker
15th May 2001, 16:32
Oh, and rugger, the problem wasn't with the realtek chips per se, but that NIC manufacturers insisted on using cheap support chips. I had several rt8019 based NICs and the ones from Kingston worked consistently whereas the no name ones sometimes gave problems. The rt8139 seems harder to fsck up than the earlier ones.

nehalmistry
15th May 2001, 17:13
ah krap, you guys are full of good news eh! http://forums.murc.ws/ubb/smile.gif

it's either that... for about $125 CDN....
or i get a asus CUV4X-C mobo $149 + a decent creative sound card $49 = ~$200

<sigh> now why is DFI bad? same reasons?

Rags
15th May 2001, 17:26
I feel your pain, really I do.

My opinion on the matter is that it is much better to stay with what you are currently using and save up for the hardware that is tried and true. Don't compromise on the mainboard. Stick with Asus, Abit, AOpen, and MSI. CUV4X is not that good, if you are going to go with a P2/P3 platform, go with an intel solution such as a CUBX, P3Bf, CUSL2, etc. Be aware that the CUSL2 can be had with onboard audio and video, so that can help stem the costs if need be.

Just save up and be patient, it will save you a lot of headaches in the future...really it will.

Rags

nehalmistry
15th May 2001, 19:11
rags, i know what ur saying but my computer is something like 6 years old... i aint waiting any longer... this is what im going to buy......

http://www.dfi.com/product/productlist2.asp
then click CA64-EC .... (sorry, java)
for $116 CDN = ~$77 US

and as long as its better than PCCHIPS... i think i'll be fine...

dsp
16th May 2001, 15:30
Nehalmistry,

I haven't had a problem with DFI boards. I find them stable boards (and cheap http://forums.murc.ws/ubb/smile.gif ). It's a lot better (IMHO) than any PCCHIPS board. Just my $0.02(Canadian).

dsp

nehalmistry
17th May 2001, 22:23
well, i ended up getting a gigabye GA-6VXC7-4X motheboard with via apollo pro 133a chipset.... holy crap i have never seen speeds so fast before in Halflife.... this is the best.... fast and stable....

and as for that pc chips one... yuk...... my computer is NOW all nice and dandy.. thx for all ur guys' help