Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
jessenator

PowerWave weirdness | picky about video card

Recommended Posts

That is a nice one. Good speed and all. However, as with three of my Power Computing machines, there could be a G3 upgrade hiding inside. Addendum. The 8500-180 has a 604e, so I dont think I would have a problem trying out my 180mp. It shouldn't be a problem for a 604e in your machine. But I have read that the PowerComputing CPU cards can't be put in a mac, but the apple CPU cards can run in the Powercomputing machines. Maybe you can find a cheap 180/604e to try out and see if you can get some success there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interestingly enough, I started to catalog each of the CPU daughter cards in hopes of IDing ebay listings that dont show or are missing the speed sticker/decal, but they didn't seem to differentiate by clock speed. This was all done on a whim, so I haven't put my cards in this list yet—these were complied from ebay.

mPDN9qr.jpgAlso on a whim, I bought a $7 card (the one at the bottom), and it was missing its stickers, so once I get it I'll put it in.

 

If everymac is correct, then the PCC 604/180 is the fastest non-e 604. I don't have any other pci, pre-G3 power Macs but I'm sure you're correct in that the PCC cards could NOT be used in genuine Apple motherboards.

 

Eventually I want to add the Apple cards to this list as well.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My 8500 started life as a 120mhz machine. I was able to get it from well known Seattle computer recycler REPC for a superb price. I fired it up and discovered it is sporting a g3 sonnet at 550mhz. It will be my appleip server as soon as I dig one of my 50gb scsis out of its hidey hole and clone the 1gb SCSI it has. It is relative identical in speed and introduction time frame to the power wave. I suspect that your machine must be equally as capable. That is why I was surprised the 225 wasn't working.

Your list will be invaluable at some point. It would be a nice reference chart for those of us who work on these typenof machines. When I have the chance, I will see if I can add any of my processors to that list...umax s900-233, 250 with coprocessor, the aforementioned power computing 210, the apple 180mp, i think that is it. Probably one or two in storage....

Edited by ppcoutlaw
brain fart. left out some lines.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Grrr. I keep on discovering new information with each post... Apparently the PowerTower (not pro) 180 (not 180e) runs at a 60 MHz bus speed? even though the Tsunami design spec didn't?

The 85/9500 doesn't appear to run at 60. Ah, but the original PowerTower was Catalyst-based?? and only PCC made their Catalyst boards run at 60? My brain right now... I need some sleep.

 

Well, then, I guess the 604/150 from another PowerWave is the non-604e ceiling, if MacInfo.de and Everymac are to be believed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, jessenator said:

Grrr. I keep on discovering new information with each post... Apparently the PowerTower (not pro) 180 (not 180e) runs at a 60 MHz bus speed? even though the Tsunami design spec didn't?

The 85/9500 doesn't appear to run at 60. Ah, but the original PowerTower was Catalyst-based?? and only PCC made their Catalyst boards run at 60? My brain right now... I need some sleep.

 

Well, then, I guess the 604/150 from another PowerWave is the non-604e ceiling, if MacInfo.de and Everymac are to be believed.

Yepper, several of the Power systems ran at faster bus speeds. This was a big selling point, they were faster and cheaper than comparable Apple products.

They were totally eating into Apple's high-end sales and thus had to be terminated...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting(?) new development: with all the PowerLogix system goodies disabled and with the 604/132 CPU card Sonnet Metronome freezes the system upon opening.

 

MacBench specs will read it just fine, but thought that was a strange quirk. On my 4400/Starmax 5500 boards Metronome runs with whatever's in the system. Could be that that particular daughter card is wrecking havoc with Metronome, causing it to crash?  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

PowerWave should work fine with any 225/45 card that will fit in the slot.  

 

The PowerWave is essentially a (take your pick):

 

1) 7500/8500 with the video circuitry removed.

2)  9500 with the second PCI bus removed.

 

It might not (or might) work with a 210/60 or 240/60 card.   I've had the PowerTower Pro and Umax S900 up to 62MHz bus speed, provided the CPU card properly sets the CLKID pins on the CPU card.

 

I think I covered the 8500/8600 stuff in another thread when you were getting the PW working, but in brief:

 

Three revisions:

PowerMac 8500/9500, 8600/9600. 8600 Enhanced/9600 Enhanced.

 

The "enhanced" models are the ones with the "Kansas" motherboard and the "Mach V" CPU card which  uses the PPC604ev chip.

 

Apple's CPU cards 250MHz or faster were PPC604EV, Mach V, cards which only work in the two late, enhanced models.

 

Some third party brands sold 250 MHz PPC604e cards which will work in all the non-enhanced models, both Apple and clone.

 

All of the non-Mach V Apple cards, PCC cards and Umax CPU cards should work in the  PowerWave and PowerTower Pro.

 

Except for the PowerTower Pro and PowerWave, Apple CPU cards will not work in the Power Computing clones.

 

Also, PCC cards made for the PTP and the PW may not work in the other PCC clones.   The other PCC clones are based off of the Catalyst chip set and need a couple of CPU signals which aren't brought out to card pins in the Apple cards (and the PTP/PW cards?).

 

But, that doesn't matter, because you're testing a PowerWave.   That 225/45 card should work, if it is functional.

 

If  it is a Umax card, then there are three (four?) jumpers that need to be installed at the top, because Umax had this weird double-processor scheme with a ribbon cable between the CPU cards and when the CPUs were used singly, some of the cable pins needed to be shorted with jumpers.

 

Hopefully you're testing with no cache installed.    Those can cause issues.  On the other hand, I've read of cases where things didn't work well until a cache was installed.    I guess the extra load reduced ringing on the bus or something.

 

Finally, what it really sounds like is that your power supply is marginal and when the load gets above a certain point everything goes flakey.

 

Do you have another ATX power supply on hand you could try?

 

I've also seen the PCI bus on a PowerTower Pro fail because the solder joints on the PCI arbiter chip went bad.    PCI arbiter is a little square PLCC chip, with 20 or 25 pins.  I don't remember the markings at the moment.

 

Oh, and, having an older 132 card work and a newer 225 card not work, I have seen when there were problems with the 3.3V supply on the logic board....    Just remembered that one from about 15 years ago.

 

You might take a voltmeter to the 3.3V supply, although if it's something like worn out bypass caps a voltmeter might not tell the story.   In my case, one of the chips had developed an internal short that was loading 3.3V to one of the other rails, or ground, can't remember which.  It wasn't enough to shut down the PS, but it made anything that wanted 3.3V not work.    But it could just be that the old PCC power supply isn't supplying good 3.3V, in which case a repalcement ATX PS will solve that.

Edited by trag

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks as always for the great reply, trag!

 

I think I remember you talking to the point of the Enhanced CPU cards and what the PW could handle. I took another look and the 225/45 card is definitely PCC. 

54 minutes ago, trag said:

Do you have another ATX power supply on hand you could try?

I sadly borked all of the spares (admittedly not great specimens) I had when coming up with a solution to my 4400's power supply issues. You're probably right about the PSU—It's the original, and was in a smoker's environment all its life. Working this long is a feat, even for a SeaSonic perhaps. I can scrounge one up fairly easily I reckon.

 

I'll also check the PCI riser (if that chip is on the riser of a PW anyway). I'm a knucklehead sometimes: do you mean check the 3.3V line of the PSU or somewhere on the board? If the PSU replacement would solve it, I guess it's moot, but I didn't know if something else on the board would need checked as well.

 

Interesting note too about the cache. I just barely got it, and installed after testing and putting the 132 card back in for now. I'll definitely remove it when testing this mystery PCC card.

 

Edit: Just booted with the mystery card. Turns out I may have gotten a PW original card; 604/120. the case badge is accurate now at least :lol: 

Edited by jessenator

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll reinstall TechTool tomorrow and try it again with the PSU I just got. See how it goes.
T0tXKDRl.jpg
I knew the cards got smaller as they went on, and the upgrade cards got very small indeed, but I only have seen them with the metal spacer on top to keep them secured. Didn't know they went all the way to the crossmember bar in the PW like this...

 

Also tried MacBench and got the missing "with cache" scores. The disk score... I tried that several times with the 225 and each time it got worse :lol: weird.

9adPxQTl.jpg

Edited by jessenator

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, I ran TechTool Pro last night— I get the same Mathematics test failure with the 225/45 card. I also got a couple of new test fails, which I'm certain is because my SCSI drive is almost as loud as the case fan. Maybe I'll find another 604e card and see if it's just the card I have, or if it's something else.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The problem could be caused by many things.   Another one that I've seen in my experience, at least on teh PPC601, was that getting heat sink grease on the pins caused an issue with the FPU.  I don't really understand how the short that might cause could affect just the FPU, but it did.   For the PPC601, the pins are around the outer edge of the chip, so that's where the heat sink grease ends up if one applies too much.   On a PPC604e, I think it would take a little work to get excess grease under the chip and amongst the BGA balls.

 

Probably not the problem in your case, but you know what, the heat sink grease could be worn out and the chip overheating.   As long as you're gentle, it can't hurt to pull the heat sink, clean the old grease and apply new.    And do a quick inspection to see if any has spilled over the edges of the chip.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not a bad idea even for due diligence. Stuff's probably nasty by now. I have some non-conductive thermal paste that I've used on a lot of things: my zip-tied PowerLogix G3 card for one, and I think even my PC Compatibility Card, which for a P100 is a bit overkill. The viper chip on the back side puts out way more heat…

 

I wonder if I could set up some Excel sheet to really tax the FPU and see what happens. Maybe doing something in Photoshop would be easier :lol: 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×