Roger Oberholtzer wrote:

On Tue, 2009-06-16 at 15:50 +0200, Per Jessen wrote:

...

Looks fine to me except for the KDE bit - I've just installed 11.0 on a PII 333MHz with 96Mb - doesn't run KDE, only runs a server.

This does have 250 MB of RAM. I have said that as a minimum, they will need more. I also asked if the MBs were a standard size. Perhaps they should update them instead of fighting.

But at least the kernel is happy with this vintage CPU.

The current kernel is still built for i586 I think, so even a Pentium 133 would do. I think I have one somewhere :-) /Per -- Per Jessen, Zürich (21.5°C) -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org

Larry Stotler wrote:

On Tue, Jun 16, 2009 at 10:05 AM, Per Jessen wrote:

...

The current kernel is still built for i586 I think, so even a Pentium 133 would do.  I think I have one somewhere :-)

Nope. Pentium Pro(i686) or higher. I tried to install 11.0 on a K6-2 and it refused, because it said that i586 is not supported by the current kernel.

Really? That surprises me - I was sure the minimum was still i586.

I could test the PPro part. I have 2 boards somewhere with PPro 200's and 128MB RAM........However, I ran 10.2 on one of them and it wasn't fast enough, even as a server. scp speeds on a 100Mb card was under 2MB/s, and the cpu was pegged at 100%.

Depends on what you want your server to do, I guess - even a 486DX2 can saturate a 100Mbit/s card. With rcp, not scp. /Per -- Per Jessen, Zürich (21.2°C) -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org

Per Jessen wrote:

Per Jessen wrote:

Have just checked the boxed version of 11.0 and 11.1 - minimum is still Pentium I, whereas AMD K6 is not specifically mentioned. I also started a network install of 11.0 on my Pentium 133MHz with 128Mb - no complaints, still running. Just for the hell of it, I think I'll try 11.1 too.

The 11.1 NET install ISO boots just fine on my Pentium 1. /Per -- Per Jessen, Zürich (21.1°C) -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org

On Tue, 2009-06-16 at 10:17 -0400, Ken Schneider - openSUSE wrote:

I have 11.1 installed with KDE 3.x and it seems to do all right. By the way my board is a P2B-DS motherboard with two cpu's installed. You might want to consider a lighter weight desktop for your setup.

It is on the list of possibilities. Preferably one that uses the same desktop ICON file format. We have a few desktop-based menus constructed this way. Otherwise, we do not rely on KDE. Just X11 (and tk). We do not really want to have to set up another desktop. This is to replace a UnixWare 7.x system running KDE 1.something (don't remember exactly which version). It is in use in road vehicles in the US that measure road conditions. All our other users have long moved to openSUSE 10.0 or newer. But as the systems work so well, they really do not want to change them. But there has been a hardware failure in a subsystem (a VME-based PC), and the replacement hardware is only supported by a newer OS. -- Roger Oberholtzer OPQ Systems / Ramböll RST Ramböll Sverige AB Krukmakargatan 21 P.O. Box 17009 SE-104 62 Stockholm, Sweden Office: Int +46 8-615 60 20 Mobile: Int +46 70-815 1696 -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org

On Tue, 2009-06-16 at 11:35 -0400, Felix Miata wrote:

The biggest obstacle to good performance on a P2B is the disk I/O. The onboard piix controller is Ultra DMA 2 aka UDMA33, capable of about 1/3 the throughput of the last made PATA disks. These controllers were the last PATA not to require 80 wire cables for reliable performance at max speed. I used to use SCSI instead of PATA on i440BX to get around that bottleneck, but took the last of my 100FSB systems out of service several months ago.

They use the SCSI interface on the motherboard. We have always tried to get our users to invest in good disks. -- Roger Oberholtzer OPQ Systems / Ramböll RST Ramböll Sverige AB Krukmakargatan 21 P.O. Box 17009 SE-104 62 Stockholm, Sweden Office: Int +46 8-615 60 20 Mobile: Int +46 70-815 1696 -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org

On Wed, 2009-06-17 at 10:09 +0200, Per Jessen wrote:

Roger Oberholtzer wrote:

...

On Tue, 2009-06-16 at 11:35 -0400, Felix Miata wrote:

...

The biggest obstacle to good performance on a P2B is the disk I/O. The onboard piix controller is Ultra DMA 2 aka UDMA33, capable of about 1/3 the throughput of the last made PATA disks. These controllers were the last PATA not to require 80 wire cables for reliable performance at max speed. I used to use SCSI instead of PATA on i440BX to get around that bottleneck, but took the last of my 100FSB systems out of service several months ago.

They use the SCSI interface on the motherboard. We have always tried to get our users to invest in good disks.

Roger, I have about a hundred 1/2" SCSI/SCA drives in varying sizes, ranging from 9 to 72Gb, most either 18Gb or 36Gb - would your customer be interested in purchasing some of those? (SCA drives are getting increasingly expensive and rare).

I can pass this on to those of our customers still using SCSI. Most have moved to SATA. If there are any bites, I will pass then your way. -- Roger Oberholtzer OPQ Systems / Ramböll RST Ramböll Sverige AB Krukmakargatan 21 P.O. Box 17009 SE-104 62 Stockholm, Sweden Office: Int +46 8-615 60 20 Mobile: Int +46 70-815 1696 -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org

On Tue, 2009-06-16 at 11:18 -0400, Felix Miata wrote:

On 2009/06/16 15:42 (GMT+0200) Roger Oberholtzer composed: IIRC that motherboard supports PIII up to 800 MHZ at 100FSB with the stock BIOS, faster with a special BIOS. Graphics performance from a PCI gfxcard with a 350MHz CPU might not be acceptable. If that turns out to be the case, I'd try to pick up a faster CPU and/or an AGP 1 (or 2 I think, but not 4 up) card to use with it. Those common legacy parts should be available dirt cheap or free many places, eBay or local computer shops that haven't thrown away all the old stuff. PIII CPUs require a different cooler configuration than PII.

Even those "dirt cheap" prices, once you gather CPU+RAM+Video+Shipping, seem insane as a proportion of the cost of a new and *MUCH* faster and more stable machine. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org

On 2009/06/16 11:49 (GMT-0400) Adam Tauno Williams composed:

Even those "dirt cheap" prices, once you gather CPU+RAM+Video+Shipping, seem insane as a proportion of the cost of a new and *MUCH* faster and

If you actually _need_ all those components, it would seem to make more sense to buy new instead. But then you're probably going to be forced to a whole new system, including power supply and SATA disks, and in the process loose legacy ports (floppy/lpt/com) and the ISA slots for those old proprietary legacy components that have no modern equivalents to replace them at reasonable cost, or at any cost. Oh, and the modern speedy systems make better room heaters too. That and the added electricity they consume may be another reason to keep the old stuff online until it expires on its own.

more stable machine.

I can't imagine any newer PC compatible system categorically more _stable_ than a PII or PIII on an i440BX. -- "Cast but a glance at riches, and they are gone, for they will surely sprout wings and fly off to the sky like an eagle." Proverbs 23:5 NIV Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 Felix Miata *** http://fm.no-ip.com/ -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org

On 2009/06/16 19:24 (GMT+0200) Per Jessen composed:

Felix Miata wrote:

...

Oh, and the modern speedy systems make better room heaters too. That and the added electricity they consume may be another reason to keep the old stuff online until it expires on its own.

Maybe it's a case of YMMV, but my experience is exactly the opposite - we've very recently replaced a number of older Compaq Proliant quad-PIII 700MHz machines with a single modern 8-core 2.8GHz HP Proliant. The new box does quite a lot more work per kwH. Older single-core systems really are a lot less energy efficient.

A quad PIII is anything but run of the mill. More typical PIII machines can get by on 120 watt or less power supplies, with 200 or 225 typically installed, instead of a demand for 300 watt or more like in current systems. 40mm & 60mm fans worked for PIII coolers. Few current chips are happy with less than 80mm fans for their coolers, and 90mm isn't unusual. Gfxcards used to need no chip coolers. Now passive coolers aren't even enough. Those large active gfxcard coolers mean a lot more heat is generated in modern systems. Newer might be slightly more efficient per MHz, or even considerably more, but they're mostly running at 3-10 times the MHz, with highly demanding gfxcards, so doing more room heating and watt consumption on average. -- "Cast but a glance at riches, and they are gone, for they will surely sprout wings and fly off to the sky like an eagle." Proverbs 23:5 NIV Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 Felix Miata *** http://fm.no-ip.com/ -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org

On 2009/06/16 20:07 (GMT+0200) Per Jessen composed:

Felix, like I said, YMMV - you're clearly talking about office/home

A point of the thread is YMMV, so it went and goes without saying.

desktops and workstations, whereas I'm talking about servers in racks in a datacentre. Our servers have at least two power supplies, multiple hot-plug redundant fans etc etc. We tend to be quite conservative wrt upgrading hardware, but our recent upgrades have reduced both electricity and airconditioning costs.

I would expect a single quad core system replacing a quad CPU system could save overall, but that's not a majority upgrade scenario. Quad CPU systems were never big sellers. Home and office desktops far outnumber servers. Average power consumption on the desktop is up, even though efficiency is up too. RAM often now requires heatsink cooling, another sign of increased power consumption, on top of generally increased RAM requirements of newer software. Motherboard chipset coolers, like gfxchip coolers non-existent in 440BX days, are mandatory on current systems. Gfxcards often need so much current they require a dedicated power connector instead of making do with power from the motherboard bus. Giant hard drives installed in plastic rails instead of heat-conductive metal cages are too hot to touch and often die quickly. Typical power supply output power growth from sub-200 yesteryear to 300+ today sums up the story. Power consumption should figure into the equation whether to take equipment out of service, not just whether kernels still support old hardware (thread topic). To ignore power consumption is an ecologically bankrupt attitude to have. It must be taken into account in responsible hardware retirement & support decisions. -- "Cast but a glance at riches, and they are gone, for they will surely sprout wings and fly off to the sky like an eagle." Proverbs 23:5 NIV Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 Felix Miata *** http://fm.no-ip.com/ -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org

On Tue, 2009-06-16 at 21:26 +0200, Per Jessen wrote:

...

Average power consumption on the desktop is up, even though efficiency is up too. RAM often now requires heatsink cooling, another sign of increased power consumption, on top of generally increased RAM requirements of newer software. I don't the efficiency of a desktop PC is really much of a topic. When we're talking about computational power per unit-of-energy, it's not very useful to talk about a system that is idling and in power-save mode most of the time. In fact, I have to wonder if average power consumption on the desktop really is up - I would have thought power-saving measures have become so much better in just the last 2-3 years, that average consumption would have gone down.

We have ~300 workstations/desktops and we measured power consumption as part of a cost analysis. Newer desktops used less power, period, no-contest. To get useful results you need a meter that can record power consumption over time (several days), just using a watt-meter gives meaningless results. Note that we are talking about 'normal' business-class desktops and not some gaming hot-rod which. And speaking of power: older CRTs vs. LCD is also a no-contest issue.

...

Power consumption should figure into the equation whether to take equipment out of service, not just whether kernels still support old hardware (thread topic). Well, the openSUSE kernel CPU support issue has long been cleared up - Pentium I's are still supported, period. Wrt power consumtion, I completely agree - except my experience is that modern systems use less energy.

Our dual-quad servers consume less power than some of the [very] old dual PIIIs we buried out behind the sheds. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org

On 2009/06/16 21:26 (GMT+0200) Per Jessen composed:

I don't the efficiency of a desktop PC is really much of a topic. When we're talking about computational power per unit-of-energy, it's not very useful to talk about a system that is idling and in power-save mode most of the time. In fact, I have to wonder if average power consumption on the desktop really is up - I would have thought power-saving measures have become so much better in just the last 2-3 years, that average consumption would have gone down.

I don't see how anyone could infer our discussion applies to systems in power saving modes. Whatever gets used in those modes isn't materially related to what gets used when the systems are actually _used_. None of my systems are ever allowed into a "power saving mode", other than being turned off when unneeded. Probably newer systems are better at getting into and out of power savings modes. I've never see stats to translate theoretical power saving improvements into what happens in real life. The only way to know is probably to put watt meters on similarly little used old and new systems side by side. My electric consumption here is up roughly 300 watts/month (20-30%) over 10 years ago, even though nearly everything since acquired is supposedly more efficient than whatever it replaced, and insulation has been since added. -- "Cast but a glance at riches, and they are gone, for they will surely sprout wings and fly off to the sky like an eagle." Proverbs 23:5 NIV Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 Felix Miata *** http://fm.no-ip.com/ -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org

Felix Miata wrote:

On 2009/06/16 21:26 (GMT+0200) Per Jessen composed:

...

I don't the efficiency of a desktop PC is really much of a topic. When we're talking about computational power per unit-of-energy, it's not very useful to talk about a system that is idling and in power-save mode most of the time. In fact, I have to wonder if average power consumption on the desktop really is up - I would have thought power-saving measures have become so much better in just the last 2-3 years, that average consumption would have gone down.

I don't see how anyone could infer our discussion applies to systems in power saving modes.

You were talking about desktops and/or workstations - the usual work profile for such systems is tied to how people work, and there is plenty of opportunity for a system to reduce power when not in use. Reduce CPU frequency and what have you. An vanilla openSUSE installation comes with powersaved which is AFAIK meant to govern some or all of those measures. (CPU frequency scaling for instance). AMD CPUs also have very good built-in power management features.

I've never see stats to translate theoretical power saving improvements into what happens in real life.

In large offices, modern PCs with various kinds of power saving measures have reduced energy consumption considerably - not just the energy needed for the PCs, but also the energy needed for the airconditioning.

The only way to know is probably to put watt meters on similarly little used old and new systems side by side.

Yep something like that would work. On the other hand I just need to check my electricity bill to see that my newer systems use less. /Per -- Per Jessen, Zürich (16.4°C) -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org

On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 1:17 AM, David C. Rankin wrote:

Sorry I'm late on this one Roger, but the short answer is -- your client will be pushing it. I don't think kde3.5 will be usable on that hardware. I have a 10.3 box that is an AMD k6-2 450 w/256M that run 10.3 just fine without any desktop. Running kde 3.5 on it would be just about out of the question. The box works great as a fax-server, but desktop speed isn't what it has....

I've run 11.0/KDE3 on a Thinkpad 390X/P3-500/256MB RAM with no issues(waiting on a replacement motherboard.....). I reguarly run my X21 and it's a P3/700. Low end systems are very viable. You just have to realistic about the limits. Youtube sucks on them. However, I can play high bitrate XviDs on a P3/450 and a NeoMagic 256 chip with 2.5MB VRAM, so it depends on what you need to do. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org