According to this list, a 3.06 with Hyperthreading is the highest performer supported by the SiS chipset (though the BIOS may not support it even though the chipset does). The 2.8/533/1024 might be a good second choice .
https://www.cpu-upgrade.com/mb-SiS_(chipsets)/651.html

Repo Man11 wrote on 2022-05-03, 20:24:

According to this list, a 3.06 with Hyperthreading is the highest performer supported by the SiS chipset (though the BIOS may not support it even though the chipset does). The 2.8/533/1024 might be a good second choice .
https://www.cpu-upgrade.com/mb-SiS_(chipsets)/651.html

I had that 2.8ghz 1MB in mind but I didn't quote so as not to influence future comments 🤣

I think I'll install this 2.8ghz

It appears that the 2.8/1024/533 will be easy to find - I just did a search and one came up for $4.95. I have one as I thought it would be just the thing for my SiS 645 motherboard, but it turned out that board/chipset doesn't work with 1024 L2, only 512. I also tried a 3.06, thinking that if the board didn't support Hyperthreading, it would ignore it, but it caused blue screens.

Edit: now that I think about it, since I had the same issue with both the 3.06 and the 2.8 with 1024 L2, perhaps it was the extra 512K L2 on the 3.06 that caused the issue and the Hyperthreading was irrelevant?

I have them in droves in a box in my basement. As for these SIS "graphics solutions"? Is very bad? I'm going to buy an AGP card for it in the near future, but I'll have to be content with this SiS 315, opinions about it out there are very divergent, because I believe there were several versions, including offboard, and they also had different performance in different OEM.

Also, it has its AGP slot occupied by a card that I've never seen in my life, it's a card that only has an RCA and an S-Video output, I think maybe it's some kind of expansion of the onboard video card, but no I'm sure, because I haven't dismantled the machine yet to see it up close.

Rikintosh wrote on 2022-05-03, 22:07:

I have them in droves in a box in my basement. As for these SIS "graphics solutions"? Is very bad? I'm going to buy an AGP card for it in the near future, but I'll have to be content with this SiS 315, opinions about it out there are very divergent, because I believe there were several versions, including offboard, and they also had different performance in different OEM.

Also, it has its AGP slot occupied by a card that I've never seen in my life, it's a card that only has an RCA and an S-Video output, I think maybe it's some kind of expansion of the onboard video card, but no I'm sure, because I haven't dismantled the machine yet to see it up close.

The SIS315 is horrible, anything from a Geforce 2 and up will trounce it. The RCA/Svideo board is most likely a TV tuner?

I've got the later model with the coloured VFD display, there is also an odd FM tuner in there but couldn't find the drivers for it (MSI put a serial no to this software)

Rikintosh wrote on 2022-05-03, 22:07:

Also, it has its AGP slot occupied by a card that I've never seen in my life, it's a card that only has an RCA and an S-Video output, I think maybe it's some kind of expansion of the onboard video card, but no I'm sure, because I haven't dismantled the machine yet to see it up close.

Would love to see a pic of that card.
Sure it's an AGP? Some of those media-oriented rigs of the time had all kinds of weird stuff in them.
RCA and mini-DIN connectors point to video out, in or both. May well be a mere extension to the onboard graphics. Not TV tuner, those will have a connector for a coaxial antenna cable and usually some metal shielding box. Just google PCI TV card.

CPU: Well, is one in there? That would be a great one, it's already in there. 😜
As of the power consumption / heat issue: Well, it's a netburst chip, so you've maybe come to the wrong place anyway? Take it as a challenge, there's no such thing as too hot, only too few holes or too loud.
Install a watercooler with external radiator 😉

I googled up an ixbt review and they used a 3.06 - it depends on the chipset's stepping aparently.

The 2.8/1mb/533 was basically a Celeron (low FSB, no HT, but still 103W TDP) with full cache IMO. A 'good' match for cripppled/factory ewaste models such as the Dell Dimension 3000 IMO...

1MB cache means Prescott. If you're looking for a balance between performance and TDP, you probably want a Northwood, especially if you're worried about chipset-CPU compatibility. Northwood is older and as such is more likely to be supported by both your chipset and BIOS.

There's a 533MHz FSB 3.06GHz P4 HT Northwood chip at 81.8w (S-spec SL6K7, SL6JJ, SL6S5, SL6SM, SL6PG,SL6QC), or if you're worried about the TDP you can get a non-HT 2.8 at 68w, or you can look lower.

To illustrate the TDP difference (all chips 800MHz FSB so are inapplicable to your build),
2.8GHz P4 HT Northwood: 69.7W
2.8GHz P4 HT Prescott: 84/89W

3.4GHz P4 HT Northwood: 89W
3.4Ghz P4 HT Prescott: 115W or 103W

You won't be able to get Hyperthreading out of any of the Prescott chips, all the Prescott HT chips are either 800MHz+ FSB or Socket 775. (Unless, of course, you wanted to try to run a mobile Pentium 4 HT Prescott chip, in which case you could maybe get the best of both worlds. 533MHz FSB, reduced TDP, hyperthreading, doubled L2 cache. At that point I'd still say the Northwood chips are a better option if you're worried about TDP, they range from 66.1-76w TDP while the Prescotts are all 88w. All the mobile chips are 533MHz or 400MHz FSB. It's just less certain that your motherboard will support these.)

He still hasn't reached me, I only have these pictures. Watercooler would be out of the question due to lack of space. I don't want to be picky with TDP as I know all P4's get hot, I just want to make sure I install "the best I can". I can't wait to play farcry. I think I have a GF4 around here that will fit him like a glove.

Oh I think I remember those computers. Those were cool, never had one though. I ended up getting a shuttle

Repo Man11 wrote on 2022-05-03, 20:24:

According to this list, a 3.06 with Hyperthreading is the highest performer supported by the SiS chipset (though the BIOS may not support it even though the chipset does). The 2.8/533/1024 might be a good second choice .
https://www.cpu-upgrade.com/mb-SiS_(chipsets)/651.html

If I recall correctly it was a particularly saught after chip also, being as it not only was binned over 3ghz, it had a really high multiplier too!

Sphere478 wrote on 2022-05-04, 04:30:

Oh I think I remember those computers. Those were cool, never had one though. I ended up getting a shuttle

Repo Man11 wrote on 2022-05-03, 20:24:

According to this list, a 3.06 with Hyperthreading is the highest performer supported by the SiS chipset (though the BIOS may not support it even though the chipset does). The 2.8/533/1024 might be a good second choice .
https://www.cpu-upgrade.com/mb-SiS_(chipsets)/651.html

If I recall correctly it was a particularly saught after chip also, being as it not only was binned over 3ghz, it had a really high multiplier too!

Yep I too considered the Mega PC back in the day but went with a 478 Shuttle, with the HT 3.06GHz CPU.

Did Prescott stress out early 478 motherboards? I remember killing an Asrock board that was running fine with a Northwood by installing a Prescott, a MOSFET burned out (though that could just be a faulty part). Heat dissipation is a big consideration in an SFF, the 3.06 heated up everything in the case, even after adding extra fans and the ventilated case cover. Might want to play it safe with a 2.8 Northwood ...

JidaiGeki wrote on 2022-05-04, 05:39:

Sphere478 wrote on 2022-05-04, 04:30:

Oh I think I remember those computers. Those were cool, never had one though. I ended up getting a shuttle

Repo Man11 wrote on 2022-05-03, 20:24:

According to this list, a 3.06 with Hyperthreading is the highest performer supported by the SiS chipset (though the BIOS may not support it even though the chipset does). The 2.8/533/1024 might be a good second choice .
https://www.cpu-upgrade.com/mb-SiS_(chipsets)/651.html

If I recall correctly it was a particularly saught after chip also, being as it not only was binned over 3ghz, it had a really high multiplier too!

Yep I too considered the Mega PC back in the day but went with a 478 Shuttle, with the HT 3.06GHz CPU.

Did Prescott stress out early 478 motherboards? I remember killing an Asrock board that was running fine with a Northwood by installing a Prescott, a MOSFET burned out (though that could just be a faulty part). Heat dissipation is a big consideration in an SFF, the 3.06 heated up everything in the case, even after adding extra fans and the ventilated case cover. Might want to play it safe with a 2.8 Northwood ...

I was able to run a presshot in my shuttle. That heat pipe cooler worked well

The title of this thread is a trick question.

Cool looking PC! I'd first experiment with the mobo and see what range of voltages is available. If it supports low voltages (1.2V and lower) I'd try a Pentium 4-M 2.6 @ 35W. Otherwise, I wouldn't put anything over 60W TDP in that case: 2.4 Northwood would fit nicely.

Is it running stock PSU? It originally came with 200W one. I wouldn't risk putting >3GHz P4 there 😀

EDIT:
According to the manual it should support HT: an option to enable/disable it in bios is described in the manual.

happycube wrote on 2022-05-04, 02:40:

I googled up an ixbt review and they used a 3.06 - it depends on the chipset's stepping aparently.

The 2.8/1mb/533 was basically a Celeron (low FSB, no HT, but still 103W TDP) with full cache IMO. A 'good' match for cripppled/factory ewaste models such as the Dell Dimension 3000 IMO...

Saw that review, and yeah MSI don't list the 3.06 HT as suitable for this (heat / compatibility?) - https://web.archive.org/web/20060522123937/ht … ?UID=431&kind=4

Saying that I have the 3.06 HT in an even smaller old barebones cube system (currently a pile of parts!), the Iwill XP4evo with the Intel 845GV chipset - 1GB of PC3200 and a passive Radeon HD5450 in the single PCI slot - and never found excessive heat to be an issue, though picking the right cooler / fan combo does help (I rigged my own combo from a bare Intel copper-base heatsink and a 90mm quiet fan)

It came without the case cover, it has some acrylic plates that I believe come from the LCD backlight, but I intend to make a new acrylic cover, but with several ventilation holes.

I don't intend to make a stupidly fast machine, I have another build with a pentium 4 3.8ghz, I only intend to have a balanced and rational pentium 4, not to waste TDP. His power supply is 200w, but it seems to have good quality components, his hard disk will be replaced by an SSD, I think this will help with energy consumption and heat inside the machine.

I don't want a machine with an annoying whir all the time, of a fan struggling to cool an idle pentium 4. I'd love to have a Pentium 4 M in it, but I've never had any luck finding a desktop card that works with one.

I got a radeon 4650 agp 1gbddr2, but I think it's too much for this little machine.

You may want to get a cheap P4 M chip just to test if it's compatible. If it is, one of the P4 M chips might be your best option. If it isn't, you're probably out a few bucks.

Even if it sends the wrong voltage to the chip, it'd probably be fine. I'm relatively sure the chips are the same dies as the desktop chips, so they're probably just down-binned to support lower voltages. They should be able to tolerate the standard voltages fine.

Even if compatibility is not specifically listed, it may work anyway.

Error 0x7CF wrote on 2022-05-04, 20:43:

You may want to get a cheap P4 M chip just to test if it's compatible. If it is, one of the P4 M chips might be your best option. If it isn't, you're probably out a few bucks.

Even if it sends the wrong voltage to the chip, it'd probably be fine. I'm relatively sure the chips are the same dies as the desktop chips, so they're probably just down-binned to support lower voltages. They should be able to tolerate the standard voltages fine.

Even if compatibility is not specifically listed, it may work anyway.

I have no problems with processors, I have a lot of pentium 4 models, because here in my country, they are simply thrown in the trash, very few models are in demand. I have some pentium4M models, I know that the inverse (putting a regular pentium 4 in a pentium4m notebook) will make the equipment work for a while, but then the VRM will die, I killed 3 notebooks like that (at the time I didn't know that there were pentium 4 mobile with IHS, I just confused it with desktop versions)

It's not gonna kill your desktop board, the laptop VRMs probably died as a result of higher CPU heat output and power draw. The mobile chip in a desktop board would be the opposite, if anything it should be kinder to the VRMs.