Juha Saarinen wrote:
> Well, check the Linux mailing lists -- reading those, and having battled
> with a Tyan Tiger 133 for ages now, I would be extremely hesistant depend
> on anything with a VIA chip set onboard. I'm sure that they'll get it
> right at some point, but at the moment, stability and reliability still
> seems to equal Intel, and then preferably a 440BX chip set.
Depends on the revision of the Tiger 133. Tyan is like the
Microsoft of the mainboard world. You gotta wait for revision C or
D before it's good. Late revisions of the Tiger 133 are quite
stable. But early revisions? Watch out!
One chipset that is a blessing and a curse is the ServerSet III from
ServerWorks (fka RCC). Even Intel has OEM'd it for their high-end
boards -- damn they know how to make memory and CPU controllers (let
alone the 1GBps north-to-southbridge interconnect)! The catch is
the on-board Ultra33 controller is just getting support now in the
kernel, and the AGP is a slouch. Of course, if you're paying $300+
for a mainboard, you should be going SCSI (or at least 3Ware
ATA-RAID) -- hence, "ServerWorks." ;-PPP
> (I know about Intel's past chip set gaffes, so no flames, please.)
I personally cannot stand people who say "this company sucks, or
that company sucks." It all comes down to specific parts and
models. E.g., the ViA 686A (Ultra66) southbridge has compatibility
and performance problems galore, but the newer ViA 686B (Ultra100)
bests the ICH2 (Ultra100) southbridge in most people's eyes (and has
a higher handwidth channel to the northbridge too).
-- TheBS
--
Bryan J. Smith mailto:b.j.smith@xxxxxxxx chat:thebs413
SmithConcepts, Inc. http://www.SmithConcepts.com
==========================================================
Linux 'Worms' exploit known security holes that were fixed
3-12 months earlier. NT/2000 'Worms' exploit unknown se-
curity holes that won't be fixed for another 3-12 months.
|