Schmoburger
Well-known member
So, after reading trag's contribution to a thread involving CPU card compatibility in edge-slot Powermacs, I note that there are actually fairly significant differences between the Tsunami and later Kansas boards in the 9600... In any case, I decided to pull out my spare 9600 board to identify it and discovered it is actually a Kansas unit. My 9600, being a 200MP, is the earlier Tsunami architecture. Now this for one, explains why it wouldnt operate with the 200MP card in the spare board.
Anyway, as it stands, I currently run the 9600 in a heavily upgraded form with a Sonnet G3/400 CPU, 768Mb of RAM interleaved, an aftermarket bootable wide SCSI card, 3 hard drives, CD-R drive, a Targa2000, firewire and USB cards and a later 8Mb TT128 video card. Once I get hold of some more gear I will be using it occasionally to do some video and sound work just for funzies, as well as being my support machine for all the old gear. The question I have is, is there any benefit to having one board over the other... I am aware that if I ever want to revert to the stock dual-604e config, I will need to use the original board. But in the current configuration, is there any benefit (or vice) to using the Kansas board?
Anyway, as it stands, I currently run the 9600 in a heavily upgraded form with a Sonnet G3/400 CPU, 768Mb of RAM interleaved, an aftermarket bootable wide SCSI card, 3 hard drives, CD-R drive, a Targa2000, firewire and USB cards and a later 8Mb TT128 video card. Once I get hold of some more gear I will be using it occasionally to do some video and sound work just for funzies, as well as being my support machine for all the old gear. The question I have is, is there any benefit to having one board over the other... I am aware that if I ever want to revert to the stock dual-604e config, I will need to use the original board. But in the current configuration, is there any benefit (or vice) to using the Kansas board?