Wow this thread blew up all of a sudden, thanks for your interest!
I have ZERO parts right now, no 9150, no Crescendo, no adapter, no HPV card. I was just wondering if this kind of setup was even possible. I have a big gap in my collection at the moment between the 950 and my G4 Quicksilver. The 9150+G3/HPV would be the ideal machine but I'm afraid it'll take years or even decades before I can piece it all together.
That said, we can certainly start making some mock ups and it's only a matter of time before those flex cables crumble away.
This was my first supposition- is there enough cable to safely loop it over itself? Looks physically possible from your photo (and hot air assistance is a good idea) though there are no other Nubus cards to collide with either.Remove every one of those dagnabbit NuBus card support modules! Angle the HPCard up into the overhead and over across the four NuBus Slots. Some hot air cable rework required. All four Nubus Slots available, more or less. The Card in Slot D nearest the PDS may need to be a tad on the short side? Maybe some addl. hot air rework cable flexion? Dunno, total rise and run of the shed roof limited by case dimensions.
9150s are rare enough that it's a pipe dream, but I would take the shot if an opportunity arose.
If one could retain four Nubus slots in addition to HPV/G4 that'd be pretty sweet. The /120 model will also have BART21, so potentially the second fastest/most complete Nubus Apple shipped, behind the 840AV's. The 8100/100 I already have isn't far behind, and would be theoretically identical if I clocked it at 40/120MHz, minus one Nubus slot.
Not the machine's performance as a whole, but the maximum Nubus performance. Apple's BART chips tie the 601 bus to Nubus, and it's not done quite as efficiently as the 840AV's Nubus 90 implementation. ATTO SE IV scores are more like 16MB/s on my 8100, where 840AVs will get over 18MB/s.I fail to see how the stock 9150/80 could be considered slower than an 840AV?
The WGS pisces card wouldn't install in a 9150 without an 040 PDS slot, however the 8100 introduced the second Fast-SCSI II internal-only bus (10MB/s over 5MB/s standard- not quite fast & wide but better.)With that fourth slot available for an extra striped JackHammer array, did the 9150 even have a need for the likes of the Apple Workgroup Server 95 PDS Card
This was a fun read, thanks!
The WGS pisces card wouldn't install in a 9150 without an 040 PDS slot, however the 8100 introduced the second Fast-SCSI II internal-only bus (10MB/s over 5MB/s standard- not quite fast & wide but better.)
The WGS 95 card with cache is nice but there is a rare PDS SCSI card for the 950 that is probably much faster then anything Nubus.
Are you referring to the MicroNet Raven Pro or Storage Dimensions Data Cannon?The WGS 95 card with cache is nice but there is a rare PDS SCSI card for the 950 that is probably much faster then anything Nubus.
Height looks very promising, but yes that initial bend at the Crescendo will be brutal.Well after a bit of under the bed diving, I'm suddenly back in the 10-ring of the topic!
View attachment 39244
We're talking silly millimeters in width and height for the possibility of 4-Slot 9150 glory. Oh so very very close a run. Hot air rework not done, but necessary. Height should be good, the PCI risers slots are sitting higher than the PDS/NuBus backplane.
Ah I overlooked that, which would perfectly explain that spacing. At least it's not *less* than standard widthI looked at the same thing, but you're measuring connector to connector. You need to estimate PCB to PCB spacing, which makes them more or less equidistant to my eye so I didn't go to the OS9 graphics bubble of the QS02. PDS is centered in its edgecard connector while the NuBus card PCBs would bea at the very top edge of the outside of the EuroDIN connectors. Proof of that is to be found in the even spacing of the five Backplane slot covers.