chipset dependant?

chipset dependant?

[A van Staalduijnen]

At home I am running an old box, running an Athlon XP on the old VIA KT133 
(not KT133A) chipset. Since this box is mostly idle I am considering doing 
the old Athlon bridge hack, to turn the cpu into an Athlon XP-M, thinking 
I could be using cpufreq then, in order dynamically scale frequencies.

I wonder though if it would suffice to turn the cpu into a 'mobile', or if 
it would require a different chipset on the motherboard as well (as for 
Intels)?

Any chance cpufreq will work after modding the CPU, or would it be 
useless?


Thanks,

Arjan

Chipset dependant?

[A van Staalduijnen]

At home I am running an old desktop box, running an Athlon XP on the old 
VIA KT133 (not KT133A) chipset. Since this box is mostly idle I am 
considering doing the old Athlon bridge hack, to turn the cpu into an 
Athlon XP-M, thinking I could be using cpufreq then, in order 
dynamically scale it's frequency.

I wonder though if it would suffice to turn the cpu into a 'mobile', or 
if it would require to have a different chipset on the motherboard as well.

Any chance cpufreq will work after modding the CPU on this motherboard, 
or would it be useless?


Thanks,

Arjan

Re: chipset dependant?

[Dave Jones]

On Fri, Aug 11, 2006 at 05:21:14PM +0200, A van Staalduijnen wrote:
 > At home I am running an old box, running an Athlon XP on the old VIA KT133 
 > (not KT133A) chipset. Since this box is mostly idle I am considering doing 
 > the old Athlon bridge hack, to turn the cpu into an Athlon XP-M, thinking 
 > I could be using cpufreq then, in order dynamically scale frequencies.
 > 
 > I wonder though if it would suffice to turn the cpu into a 'mobile', or if 
 > it would require a different chipset on the motherboard as well (as for 
 > Intels)?
 > 
 > Any chance cpufreq will work after modding the CPU, or would it be 
 > useless?

useless.  You have no variable VRM on your motherboard, likely no BIOS tables,
and at best you'll just get a new CPU string in /proc/cpuinfo. At worst,
you'll get a dead cpu.

		Dave

-- 
http://www.codemonkey.org.uk

Re: chipset dependant?

[Erik Slagter]

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 817 bytes --]

On vr, 2006-08-11 at 17:21 +0200, A van Staalduijnen wrote:
> At home I am running an old box, running an Athlon XP on the old VIA KT133 
> (not KT133A) chipset. Since this box is mostly idle I am considering doing 
> the old Athlon bridge hack, to turn the cpu into an Athlon XP-M, thinking 
> I could be using cpufreq then, in order dynamically scale frequencies.
> 
> I wonder though if it would suffice to turn the cpu into a 'mobile', or if 
> it would require a different chipset on the motherboard as well (as for 
> Intels)?
> 
> Any chance cpufreq will work after modding the CPU, or would it be 
> useless?

The mod to turn the XP into an MP won't give you M)obile capabilities
but M)ultiprocessor caps. AFAIK the KT133 chipset doesn't implement any
power saving mechanism at all. Bummer...

[-- Attachment #1.2: smime.p7s --]
[-- Type: application/x-pkcs7-signature, Size: 2771 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 147 bytes --]

_______________________________________________
Cpufreq mailing list
Cpufreq@lists.linux.org.uk
http://lists.linux.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/cpufreq