Trouble booting now totally out of service

[kony]

The one I found is the Biostar M7VKE Socket A at:
<http://www.gearxs.com/gearxs/product_info.php?products_id=3624m> Since the board I'm replacing is a
Chips & Technologies M805LR with VIA KT133 chipset, AMD Duron and Athlon Socket A, PC133 SDRAM up to 1
GB, and AGP 4X (AGP2.0), the specs are very close.

That's not a very high quality board, though it might be
sufficient for a couple years use. It isn't KT133 though,
it's the integrated-video version of it. That may be fine,
windows may make the minor changes (which are only device
names, functionally it's the same chipset plus the video),
but I'd think it might be better to go with the KT133A since
you don't need the integrated video.

But possible concerns are:
They only mention the VIA VT8365 chipset which is also used in the KT133, but that is only the
Northbridge portion of the whole set per <http://www.via.com.tw/en/products/chipsets/legacy/km133/> and
I wonder what they use for the Southbridge portion and if the omission is hiding something.

You might Google for reviews and tech specs of that board,
though usually they'd use the same southbridge. The picture
shows ATA100 sticker on it, probably that means the 686B
southbridge. You can simply read the markings on your
current board's southbridge to determine which it is.

"Supports up to 1024 MB SDRAM"; "Two 168-pin DIMM sockets" which is all correct, but I wonder why they
don't mention PC100/133 like everyone else has?

Some specs are often omitted by sellers. Some even by
manufacturers on their product pages, especially with the
cheap, lesser supported boards. IMO, you'd be better off to
keep looking for a better brand of board, as boards this old
have alread depreciated, a better board shouldn't cost much
more. Even so, I expect the board would work... but I'd
check on a bios update on Biostar's site, I would not want
to run a cheap(ly supported) board on an early bios version.

They just mention AGP slot without mentioning any specs.

Board is 4X AGP, it'll support your present card.

Condition "PULLS", whatever definition they give to that term.

Usually means an old retired box had a board that still
worked- it's used most often, and probably used a lot.
It could even have caps that are failing already but not
completely dead.

I wouldn't buy an old pull, not after this much time has
passsed since it was new. Pull could equal refurb, but I'd
be inclinded to think a pull was less desirable than a
refurb.

7 day return window, $8.95 for a 1 year warrantee. Guess it's really a $39.95 mb. 7 days is too
close for my taste given that there are other unknowns with this system in getting it up & running.

All in all, they are sort of loose and lack the type of precision in describing their products that most
of the other websites I've seen have. They don't even give the board dimensions except to say mATX.

I would keep looking... not a very good board for multiple
reasons mentioned.

 

[Robert Heiling]

The one I found is the Biostar M7VKE Socket A at:
<http://www.gearxs.com/gearxs/product_info.php?products_id=3624m> Since the board I'm replacing is a
Chips & Technologies M805LR with VIA KT133 chipset, AMD Duron and Athlon Socket A, PC133 SDRAM up to 1
GB, and AGP 4X (AGP2.0), the specs are very close.

That's not a very high quality board,
[.....]
I would keep looking... not a very good board for multiple
reasons mentioned.

Thanks for that feedback. I had been feeling rather queasy about it already and that clinches it. There was
almost another site that had that board also, but the site didn't work so there are no other better sources
for that same Biostart mb. The MSI MS-6340M simply isn't available and Abit & Asus don't seem to have made an
equivalent. Gigabyte made a GA-7ZMMHC which would do the job, but the only one I've seen (Baber) was priced
at $97. I think I'm going in circles, so I probably should drop it for awhile. Since that Biostar availablity
came up just last month, maybe I should just check periodically to view the changing scenery.

In the meantime, I've set the system up on my workbench where I can put some decent light on it instead of a
flashlight. Realizing that I hadn't swapped out the new AGP card to see if it had failed, I swapped the old
ATI Radeon back in and all behavior is identical unfortunately. Just saw that monitor info might be helpful
and it's a very old Gateway Vivitron 1776 CPD-17F13

State | Power consumption| Required Resumption time | Power Indicator| Power Saving Indicator

Normal op| 100% | none | green on | orange off
Suspend | ~10% | ~3 sec | green on | orange on
Active-off| ~6% | ~10sec | green off| orange on

What I observe on the monitor is that the screen stays dark and the orange led is on steady, but the green
led comes on for a few seconds (~5-10), goes of for a few, then back on and repeats the pattern. The green-on
periods are the longer length since the system has been on some time. Pressing the front panel reset has no
effect on the led state. If we explained that previous behavior of not booting until warmed up by a vented
capacitor instead of cracked solder, could the current behavior be explained the same way by a capacitor
gradually building up a charge and then losing the charge because of the venting damage? But again, those
time periods are close to the chart, so maybe that's what's going on, but the computer is definitely
triggering it somehow.

Sure hope you haven't got tired of all these questions!

Bob

 

[kony]

On Thu, 16 Jun 2005 13:34:33 -0700, Robert Heiling

What I observe on the monitor is that the screen stays dark and the orange led is on steady, but the green
led comes on for a few seconds (~5-10), goes of for a few, then back on and repeats the pattern. The green-on
periods are the longer length since the system has been on some time. Pressing the front panel reset has no
effect on the led state. If we explained that previous behavior of not booting until warmed up by a vented
capacitor instead of cracked solder, could the current behavior be explained the same way by a capacitor
gradually building up a charge and then losing the charge because of the venting damage? But again, those
time periods are close to the chart, so maybe that's what's going on, but the computer is definitely
triggering it somehow.

It would simply be explained by a slightly different output
timing of the video card's bios display (monitor signal)
then failing since the board itself isn't posting. Nothing
to be dwelling on, it is a bit irrelevant at this point.

 

[Robert Heiling]

On Thu, 16 Jun 2005 13:34:33 -0700, Robert Heiling



It would simply be explained by a slightly different output
timing of the video card's bios display (monitor signal)
then failing since the board itself isn't posting. Nothing
to be dwelling on, it is a bit irrelevant at this point.

Noted! and many thanks again for all of the knowledgeable help you've been giving me. You've given me what I need
to know with this motherboard situation and I'll let you know how it all works out in the end.

Bob

 

[Robert Heiling]

That's not a very high quality board, though it might be
sufficient for a couple years use. It isn't KT133 though,
it's the integrated-video version of it. That may be fine,
windows may make the minor changes (which are only device
names, functionally it's the same chipset plus the video),
but I'd think it might be better to go with the KT133A since
you don't need the integrated video. <SNIP>

Sorry to bug you again on this, but I'd like your opinion if you would please. I've located another board
that fits all my specs - MSI built, Socket A, KT133, AGP, mATX, 200MHz FSB, etc and I can use my PC133
memory. They claim the boards are OEM overstock or pulls. Boards like this are pretty old and the technology
is outdated I would think, so the ones I've previously seen were priced from ~$20-$32. In this case, they're
asking $80 and claim that they will have no trouble selling them at that price. Who would buy them except
people in the same boat as I am with a failed motherboard? What do you think about that $80 price? Maybe I'm
just being too conservative.

Bob

 

[kony]

Sorry to bug you again on this, but I'd like your opinion if you would please. I've located another board
that fits all my specs - MSI built, Socket A, KT133, AGP, mATX, 200MHz FSB, etc and I can use my PC133
memory. They claim the boards are OEM overstock or pulls. Boards like this are pretty old and the technology
is outdated I would think, so the ones I've previously seen were priced from ~$20-$32. In this case, they're
asking $80 and claim that they will have no trouble selling them at that price. Who would buy them except
people in the same boat as I am with a failed motherboard? What do you think about that $80 price? Maybe I'm
just being too conservative.

$80 is a bit overpriced, they might not've cost that much at
many vendors when brand new and modern technology. I can't
help but think the whole reason they still have them is
because nobody pays $80 for it these days. Even so, this
can be what happens to older hardware- the lowest cost
vendors sell out and so on, till online the high-priced
options remain.

"Overstock or pulls" is a pretty big difference though...
No way I'd pay $80 for a pull today.

Here's one for $40, there may be others if you look around
the 'net.
http://www.targetpcinc.com/Details.asp?ItemID=2485&Res=2

I"m not claiming it's a great board, but rather I have no
experience with it and generally avoid Chaintech. Even so,
$40 less with option to return it if it doesn't work right
seems a worthwhile risk.


Then again, it could be time to bite the bullet and upgrade
the whole system, or at least a newer motherboard and some
DDR memory. This is also another reason it's good to avoid
mATX cases- as there were more KT133 full ATX boards at the
time, and still a few more today.

 

[CBFalconer]

kony wrote:
.... snip ...

Sorry to bug you again on this, but I'd like your opinion if you
would please. I've located another board that fits all my specs -
MSI built, Socket A, KT133, AGP, mATX, 200MHz FSB, etc is outdated
I would think, so the ones I've previously seen were priced from
~$20-$32. In this case, they're asking $80 and claim that they
will have no trouble selling them at that price. Who would buy
them except people in the same boat as I am with a failed
motherboard? What do you think about that $80 price? Maybe I'm
just being too conservative.

Please control your linelength. Lines should not exceed 72 chars,
and a 65 limit is better. I reformatted this.

Why get an inferior MB? Directron.com has complete 450 Mhz
systems, with HD, CPU, Video, Networking, Audio, DVD, case, PS
available for USD 69. The one I got even has ECC capabilities, but
not ECC memory.

 

[Robert Heiling]

Please control your linelength. Lines should not exceed 72 chars,
and a 65 limit is better.

I completely agree. I've recently been having an intermitant problem
with this Netscape in that regard and haven't had the time to
troubleshoot it. It has been set at 72 for an eternity.

I reformatted this.

I wish I had all that extra time on my hands.

Why get an inferior MB? Directron.com has complete 450 Mhz

Oh! I see! Go *all the way* and get an inferior system?

systems, with HD, CPU, Video, Networking, Audio, DVD, case, PS
available for USD 69. The one I got even has ECC capabilities, but
not ECC memory.

You really must be kidding me and I can take a joke, but I'll sell you
the working P-233 mmx in my garage that this one replaced for even
less than that. For only the price of a replacement motherboard, I can
use my own case, AGP board, 1/2 gig of PC133 memory, Athlon 1MHz,
CPU, WD disk drives, etc. Why in the world would I want to buy your
ancient system at any price?

Bob

 

[Robert Heiling]

$80 is a bit overpriced, they might not've cost that much at
many vendors when brand new and modern technology. I can't
help but think the whole reason they still have them is
because nobody pays $80 for it these days. Even so, this
can be what happens to older hardware- the lowest cost
vendors sell out and so on, till online the high-priced
options remain.

"Overstock or pulls" is a pretty big difference though...
No way I'd pay $80 for a pull today.

Thanks for the confirmation.

Here's one for $40, there may be others if you look around
the 'net.
http://www.targetpcinc.com/Details.asp?ItemID=2485&Res=2

Thanks! That's a good one and I don't know how I missed it. It
looks good and they have a standard 90 day warranty and the
other outfit gave only 30 days. I've emailed them to see if the
boards are new, refurb, used, etc? Probably won't hear now until
Monday, but I'll order it unless the response is bad news.

I"m not claiming it's a great board, but rather I have no
experience with it and generally avoid Chaintech. Even so,
$40 less with option to return it if it doesn't work right
seems a worthwhile risk.

I agree. That name is a turnoff though and reminds me of

Then again, it could be time to bite the bullet and upgrade
the whole system, or at least a newer motherboard and some
DDR memory. This is also another reason it's good to avoid
mATX cases- as there were more KT133 full ATX boards at the
time, and still a few more today.

I had been looking around for a bundled cpu & motherboard, Intel
or Athlon, that would take my PC133 when I found that other one
on a side track. In the final anlysis, I could just simply go
out and buy a new system, but this one is entirely adequate for
my wife's purposes and anything faster is simply overkill.

Thanks again!

Bob

 

[Robert Heiling]

Thanks! That's a good one and I don't know how I missed it. It
looks good and they have a standard 90 day warranty and the
other outfit gave only 30 days. I've emailed them to see if the
boards are new, refurb, used, etc? Probably won't hear now until
Monday, but I'll order it unless the response is bad news.

An email came today to let me know that the boards are _new_ OEM. It's
sort of funny because they also added that info to the website and in
*red*.<g> In any case, I ordered that board and I'll let you know how
it all works out after I finish the job and my wife has her computer
back.

Bob

 

[Robert Heiling]

$80 is a bit overpriced, they might not've cost that much at
many vendors when brand new and modern technology. I can't
help but think the whole reason they still have them is
because nobody pays $80 for it these days. Even so, this
can be what happens to older hardware- the lowest cost
vendors sell out and so on, till online the high-priced
options remain.

"Overstock or pulls" is a pretty big difference though...
No way I'd pay $80 for a pull today.

Here's one for $40, there may be others if you look around
the 'net.
http://www.targetpcinc.com/Details.asp?ItemID=2485&Res=2

I"m not claiming it's a great board, but rather I have no
experience with it and generally avoid Chaintech. Even so,
$40 less with option to return it if it doesn't work right
seems a worthwhile risk.

and yet another question! As mentioned in another post, I ordered the Chaintech board above that you found at
TargetPC, it has arrived, and I've got everything apart and am ready to drop the cpu & memory into the new board
and install it. However, before I do .....

The new board is the CT-7AIA and has a KT133 (note: not a KT133A) chipset and Socket A. Its included manual says:
"Supports AMD Socket A processors up to 950MHz". My cpu is 1000Mhz (1GHz and I read on another review site of a
different board that: "As with any other Socket A based board, the issue of CPU multiplier selection is locked
after by the CPU itself with an internally locked multiplier."). I've been so used to seeing the websites give
Socket A claims of up to 1.2GHz & 1.5GHz that I didn't realize that the TargetPC site didn't mention cpu speed at
all. In fact, my old board, which is also KT133 claims support for 500MHz to 1GHz. Is it possibly the case that
950MHz was the fastest Athlon out at the time they wrote that manual and that it will actually support 1GHz? or am
I in trouble?

Bob

 

[kony]

and yet another question! As mentioned in another post, I ordered the Chaintech board above that you found at
TargetPC, it has arrived, and I've got everything apart and am ready to drop the cpu & memory into the new board
and install it. However, before I do .....

The new board is the CT-7AIA and has a KT133 (note: not a KT133A) chipset and Socket A. Its included manual says:
"Supports AMD Socket A processors up to 950MHz". My cpu is 1000Mhz (1GHz and I read on another review site of a
different board that: "As with any other Socket A based board, the issue of CPU multiplier selection is locked
after by the CPU itself with an internally locked multiplier."). I've been so used to seeing the websites give
Socket A claims of up to 1.2GHz & 1.5GHz that I didn't realize that the TargetPC site didn't mention cpu speed at
all. In fact, my old board, which is also KT133 claims support for 500MHz to 1GHz. Is it possibly the case that
950MHz was the fastest Athlon out at the time they wrote that manual and that it will actually support 1GHz? or am
I in trouble?

Yes that is possible.
Install the CPU, video and memory for the time being.
When it posts, note what the board reports for CPU.
If necessary (and possible) adjust bios settings or onboard
jumpers to accomodate your CPU- keeping in mind that KT133
(non-"A") does not support 133FSB (I dont recall the
particularly of your system at this time and I'd deleted the
original post).

Install floppy drive and run memtest86 to confirm memory
stability. Memtest86 will display the CPU frequency too
even if the BIOS POST screen misidentifies the CPU. Trust
memtest86's report over the BIOS report, BUT also you can
later run a windows CPU ID tool to confirm operational
frequency. For example, "WCPUID" would tell you, as would
"CPU-Z", http://www.cpuid.org/download/cpu-z-129.zip

 

[CBFalconer]

Part 1.1 Type: Plain Text (text/plain)
Encoding: 7bit

If you want to be heard on newsgroups, do not use html nor mime
encoding. They are potentially dangerous, and the better ISPs will
simply remove them from newsgroup traffic. Usenext is a pure text
medium.

 

[Robert Heiling]

Yes that is possible.
Install the CPU, video and memory for the time being.

Then you think it will even run at all in spite of that speed conflict? That's my only real concern! I don't really
care if it runs at 950Mhz or 1000Mhz, just so it will work. I didn't want to touch the new mb if it wasn't going to
work and I had to return it.

When it posts, note what the board reports for CPU.
If necessary (and possible) adjust bios settings or onboard
jumpers to accomodate your CPU- keeping in mind that KT133
(non-"A") does not support 133FSB (I dont recall the
particularly of your system at this time and I'd deleted the
original post).

This one has a FSB jumper for 100/133. You may be thinking of 266 FSB which I've seen the KT133A supports in the later
CT-7AIA5 version of this board per: http://www.zen26266.zen.co.uk/CT-7AIA5-page1.htm

Install floppy drive and run memtest86 to confirm memory
stability.

I have the PC133 memory so it shouldn't be a problem.

Memtest86 will display the CPU frequency too
even if the BIOS POST screen misidentifies the CPU. Trust
memtest86's report over the BIOS report, BUT also you can
later run a windows CPU ID tool to confirm operational
frequency. For example, "WCPUID" would tell you, as would
"CPU-Z", http://www.cpuid.org/download/cpu-z-129.zip

Thanks again for the great help. If you give the go-ahead, it should be running sometime tomorrow.

Bob

 

[General Schvantzkoph]

System placed in service Jan 2001:
PC-Chips M805LR motherboard with VIA KT133 chipset, Athlon 1GHz cpu,
512MB SDRAM, AGP video It has run with a number of HD's & OS's over the
years including Linux, Win98 & Win2K, & with LILO and NT-loader.

Try taking out the CMOS battery for a minute then put it back in, that
will clear out the CMOS RAM. It's just a hunch but it's possible that some
parameter is in a strange state. If that doesn't work try disconnecting
the Floppy and the CDROM and see if you can boot off of the disk.

 

[Robert Heiling]

If you want to be heard on newsgroups, do not use html nor mime
encoding. They are potentially dangerous, and the better ISPs will
simply remove them from newsgroup traffic. Usenext is a pure text
medium.

I have previously explained the problem to you, so kindly get off my
case. I've been posting in newsgroups since the mid-90's and with
basically this same software and haven't had any complaints until yours.
Something, and I haven't had time to find out what, is causing my
newsreader to respond to what it thinks is html. My linewidth output is
also usually at 72, but since you brought that up, wasn't that to
accomodate teletype machines? and isn't that all a bit dated like you?

In any case, I don't take kindly to net nazis like yourself, and don't
waste much time in flame wars either. So get lost!

Bob

 

[Robert Heiling]

Try taking out the CMOS battery for a minute then put it back in, that
will clear out the CMOS RAM. It's just a hunch but it's possible that some
parameter is in a strange state. If that doesn't work try disconnecting
the Floppy and the CDROM and see if you can boot off of the disk.

Thanks for the response, but it's all been hashed out and the board has vented
capacitors and is toast. I've already got a new replacement sitting here ready
to install if it will handle my cpu.

Bob

 

[kony]

Then you think it will even run at all in spite of that speed conflict? That's my only real concern! I don't really
care if it runs at 950Mhz or 1000Mhz, just so it will work. I didn't want to touch the new mb if it wasn't going to
work and I had to return it.

Mostly likely it will run at the correct frequency but
merely not be able to make a positive ID on the CPU. It may
correctly display the operational speed, or may display
something *wrong*. For this reason it is necessary to
confirm the speed with alternate methods as mentioned
previously. It is least likely that it would run at 950
instead of 1000MHz. More like it would not POST at all, but
the odds are it will.

I cannot guarantee it, but think it is worth trying. If
there is a newer bios available you might want to update the
bios, particularly if the board has a relatively early bios
version. This may combat other bios issues in additon to
CPU identification.

"In general" such boards did support 1GHz CPU, within the
limit of the [no support for 133FSB with non-'A' KT133] it
was the issue you mentioned that they simply didn't have
that speed yet when the spec for the board was produced- and
with lesser board brands/support, they may not update their
specs for it later, and sometimes won't even fully disclose
the changes a particular bios incorporates if there's even a
newer bios available. After flashing a bios, clear CMOS.

This one has a FSB jumper for 100/133. You may be thinking of 266 FSB which I've seen the KT133A supports in the later
CT-7AIA5 version of this board per: http://www.zen26266.zen.co.uk/CT-7AIA5-page1.htm

No, KT133 non-"A" does not actually support 133FSB. It does
not matter if it has a jumper. Other non-supportive boards
also had such a jumper. Via originally had intended to be
able to get KT133 running up to 133FSB, but wasn't able to
and shipped out the chips they had at the time. LATER they
got 133FSB working right and this was the distinction of
KT133A.

I have the PC133 memory so it shouldn't be a problem.

Not so easy to assume, the board itself can be an issue even
when memory is spec'd higher, especially when a board looks
up SPD info and finds a module spec'd for (as an example)
CAS3 @ 133MHz but CAS2 @ 100MHz. In such cases there is the
potential for it to still be running the memory at most
aggressive CAS timing possible. Resolution if there were
this kind of problem is obviously different memory, or
manually setting a higher CAS #, or other things we need not
delve into at this time.

 

[CBFalconer]

I have previously explained the problem to you, so kindly get off my
case. I've been posting in newsgroups since the mid-90's and with
basically this same software and haven't had any complaints until yours.
Something, and I haven't had time to find out what, is causing my
newsreader to respond to what it thinks is html. My linewidth output is
also usually at 72, but since you brought that up, wasn't that to
accomodate teletype machines? and isn't that all a bit dated like you?

In any case, I don't take kindly to net nazis like yourself, and don't
waste much time in flame wars either. So get lost!

My, you are a surly one. I was really mean to explain some of the
facts of life to you. Do you really think I keep a list of silly
html posters who have been told the facts and responded with ugly
noises? You might consider that the cause of the message was the
appearance of the silly html, not your identity. After that you
might ponder on who placed that html on usenet in the first place.

However, if you have been doing this since the mid 90s, you do
appear to be fairly slow on the uptake.

 

[Robert Heiling]

My, you are a surly one.

You draw the reaction your posts deserve.

I was really mean to explain some of the
facts of life to you. Do you really think I keep a list of silly
html posters who have been told the facts and responded with ugly
noises? You might consider that the cause of the message was the
appearance of the silly html, not your identity. After that you
might ponder on who placed that html on usenet in the first place.

If you weren't being a childish net-nazi, you wouldn't have to worry about any
of that.

However, if you have been doing this since the mid 90s, you do
appear to be fairly slow on the uptake.

You might someday wake up to the fact that it's sop to place 'OT" or similar
in the subject header when you post something that has nothing whatsoever to
do with the subject at hand? Then again, you've had long enough to learn, but
your rudeness seems to prevail..

"If you want to post a followup via groups.google.com, don't use
the broken "Reply" link at the bottom of the article. Click on
"show options" at the top of the article, then click on the
"Reply" at the bottom of the article headers." - Keith Thompson

How about the Usenet rule limiting sigs to 3 lines. Guess you're too good for
those rules also eh? and how about pmfji? I didn't see that either. You
obviously need to get a life badly. :-(

Bob