> I am not insist on 7457 with Sonnet 1.8 GHz single.

I know :-) I just want to explain myself why I'm confident that the lowendmac.com list is incorrect in this regard. Feel free to ignore my ramblings if you don't find them interesting or useful.

> I just looking for real info about overclocked 7457 VCore. Information
> if Sonnet had 7447 or 7457 is redundant for this question.

Not quite, I think. If Sonnet really used 7457 CPUs overclocked up to 1.8 GHz, the info you're seeking may be derivable somehow from (preferably non-destructively) examining such Sonnet card. If they didn't, they are not.

>> I'm with you that in the case of the Sonnet Encore/ST G4 cards,
>> 745x comes with L3 cache deployed.

> 7457 can be connected without L3 cache. [...]
> But it makes no big sense in case of Sonnet

Yes, absolutely.

> 7447 had these times higher default frequency

I'm not sure what "default frequency" means here, but yes, in terms of maximum rated frequency, during the first year, the 7457 was 1267 MHz vs. 1300 MHz of 7447. After that, the 7447 got downrated to 1267 MHz as well. This happened around 03/2004.

> > I just looking for real info about overclocked 7457 VCore. Information
> > if Sonnet had 7447 or 7457 is redundant for this question.

> Not quite, I think. If Sonnet really used 7457 CPUs overclocked up to 1.8 GHz, the info
> you're seeking may be derivable somehow from (preferably non-destructively) examining such
> Sonnet card. If they didn't, they are not.

I never thought Kronos had a Sonnet - they are rare. At first I supposed to find somebody who made CPU swap and overclocked 7457 to 1.8 GHz. I found such guy, but he don't know exactly the VCore, because after several month with 1.8 GHz he lower frequency because of high fan noise ( i.e. not ideal cooling )
If somebody has Sonnet, it will be fine, but probably he don't want to remove cooler and investigate settings.

> I'm not sure what "default frequency" means here, but yes, in terms of maximum rated
> frequency, during the first year, the 7457 was 1267 MHz vs. 1300 MHz of 7447. After that,
> the 7447 got downrated to 1267 MHz as well. This happened around 03/2004.

and after that 7447B/C rated frequency rises upto 1700 MHz, and frequency of 7457 stayed on 1267 MHz all the time.

> 7447B/C rated frequency rises upto 1700 MHz

Already 7447A had 1.7 GHz maximum rated frequency, as discussed a year ago :-)

> frequency of 7457 stayed on 1267 MHz all the time.

Interestingly, there was a 1333 MHz 7457 listed in 2006 as "No Longer Manufactured" (MC7457RX1333PC*, RoHS-compliant replacement part was 1267 MHz), while 7447 was kept at 1267 MHz.
With the advent of the higher-clocking 7447A, Motorola/Freescale simply EOL'ed the 745x line. I don't remember I ever read an official explanation as to why no 7457A/B/C or 7458 was released.


* I also found mention of MC7457RX1333PB, but not sure if genuine or fake part number

Quote:

Not really, at least back in the day when MorphOS started PMac_G4 support you could pretty much always find something on ebay, often as part of a full system (the fact that I could replace my thought to be broken 2x1.8 at short notice is proof to that).

What was rare and is pure unobtainium today are the 2GHt Nevertech units or the 2x1.8 Sonnet for MDD/FW800.

Quote:

If I will find such card, and there will be 7448 inside ( it should be) it will be fine. But is still very interesting to look how the caches speeds all things. Short info from graphs in pre-previous post:

7448 ( L2: 1 MB ) - 2.0 GHz = 108 %
7457 ( L2: 512 kB + L3: 2 MB ) - 1.6 GHz = 100 %
7447 ( L2: 512 kB ) - 2.0 GHz = 86 %

For me will be enough to clock 7457 CPUs somewhere between 1.58 - 1.75 GHz for ideal performance/cooling/consumption.
Even if CPU can go to 1.83 GHz, in this case will be slightly over max frequency also my L3 cache chips and I am too lazy to modified this.


And now I return to topics:
Please, can you recommend me device for measuring of real computer consumption?
Ideally some tested, with corrected errors of blind currents and with connection to standard plug?

>> the 2GHt Nevertech units or the 2x1.8 Sonnet for MDD/FW800

> If [...] there will be 7448 inside ( it should be)

There've been two versions of the Newer Technology MAXPower G4 2.0 GHz (which is not for MDD/FW800), an older one with 7447A(/B/C) and a newer one with 7448. The Sonnet Encore/MDX G4 Duet 1.8 GHz (XG4D-1800) only has 7447A(/B/C).

Is the clock speed stated on Wikipedia (G4) the theoretical max cycles the cpus can reach?

Because mine is listed as 500–867 MHz whereas if I do a cli c:cpu, I get the wonderful :

System: PowerMac3,1
Machine: 0x1
PageSize: 4096 Bytes
CPUCount: 1
CPU0: 7451 (G4) Version 32768 Revision 515
CPU0: CPUClock 1600000000 BusClock 99630669
CPU0: FPU Unit exists
CPU0: Altivec Unit exists
CPU0: Performance Monitor Unit exists
CPU0: DataStream Unit exists
CPU0: ReservationSize 32
CPU0: Ticks 4
CPU0: CacheL1Type 0x0
CPU0: CacheL1Flags 0x1000F
CPU0: ICacheL1Size 16384
CPU0: ICacheL1Lines 512
CPU0: ICacheL1LineSize 32
CPU0: DCacheL1Size 16384
CPU0: DCacheL1Lines 512
CPU0: DCacheL1LineSize 32
CPU0: CacheL2Type 0x0
CPU0: CacheL2Flags 0x1001D
CPU0: ICacheL2Size 524288
CPU0: ICacheL2Lines 0
CPU0: ICacheL2LineSize 0
CPU0: DCacheL2Size 524288
CPU0: DCacheL2Lines 0
CPU0: DCacheL2LineSize 0

^Which is basically double the clock compared to what wikipedia states.

> Is the clock speed stated on Wikipedia (G4)
> the theoretical max cycles the cpus can reach?
> Because mine is listed as 500–867 MHz whereas if I do a cli c:cpu,
> I get the wonderful :
> [...]
> System: PowerMac3,1 [...]
> CPU0: 7451 (G4) Version 32768 Revision 515
> CPU0: CPUClock 1600000000 BusClock 99630669
> [...]
> ^Which is basically double the clock compared to what wikipedia states.

Yes, 867 MHz is the maximum rated clock frequency of the 7451. It can certainly reach nowhere near the MorphOS-stated 1.6 GHz. That's just MorphOS using bogus base values for some reason and thus calculating wrong CPU clock. Nothing to worry about and has happened before. It may have to do with your CPU card not being the original 350...500 MHz 7400 one.

Hmm, well, I do have a cpu accelerator on board but I can't be sure it's a Sonnet or not. What I am sure about is that the system is no way near 800-900Mhz target value because I get easily 75 fps on Quake 3 at 1280x1024 all max settings with multiple enemies on screen. Also, I have a powerbook 1.67Ghz and apart from faster system buses, cpu intensive tasks are almost identical. Finally as stated in this LW benchmark, my system is double faster than the 800Mhz microA1, faster than the pbook 1.33Ghz and much closer to the X5000 2.2Ghz.

I did some spoofing with OF but got nowhere since the cpu gets reported as /PowerPC, 60?@0 (I think this was an issue with some Sonnet boards, which were not reported properly and needed some patching?), whereas clock-frequency too states: 05f03e4d which is the hex for 99630669 decimal (in hz) which in return is equal to ~99.63Mhz and thus it must be referring at cpu bus instead of actual clock speed (is my logic correct so far?).

I also tried to burn an Lubuntu 16.04 LTS but as as soon as I fire up the terminal, system hangs. Couldn't be bothered to disconnect my devices as this is my main home setup, it's MorphOS exclusive, and don't want to interfere with it. Is there any linux live ppc distro with cmd prompt to check systems specs /wo entering the desktop mode nor installing it at all?

To me, it looks more probable that MorphOS could be reporting wrongly cpu version instead of clock speed, unless I have a miraculous 7451 G4 and Wikipedia is just full of bs one more time.

Sonnets usually have a purple heatsink and 1.6GHz versions do exist. So quick look and a picture coul clear that up.

The plot thickens :D

Here's a photo from the top and another one from the side.

Furthermore, according to this site the only possible candidates for this type of PowerMac (Sawtooth) are 4 options.and the only relevant photo I could find on the net is this one (from some Japanese website, claiming to be indeed a FastMac).

If the above are true then this is a 7455 @ 1.53Ghz (?), hence there is a chance that MorphOS could be reporting both cpu and clock wrong, wtf?

From the benchmark posted above (and the overall experience), I am pretty sure that given its speed this must be a cpu with a massive L3 cache in order to keep and/or beat my 1.67Ghz 7447A pbook in some areas of cpu intensive tasks. Also, the system was used for professional DTP (Photoshop) around 13 yrs ago when I bought it, which makes the 7455 even more attractive as an upgrade back then.

I 'll try to locate and burn another version of Lubuntu to fire a terminal and check with lshw command to see what it states.

> the only relevant photo I could find on the net is this one

The archived FastMac website has more photos.

> claiming to be indeed a FastMac

I just found you reported on your "FastMac 1.6Ghz G4 7451" already two years ago :-)

> If the above are true then this is a 7455 @ 1.53Ghz (?), hence there is a
> chance that MorphOS could be reporting both cpu and clock wrong, wtf?

According to the DIP switch table on page 4 of the installation guide, the 7455 on the card can be clocked up to 1.50 GHz on 100 MHz bus machines and up to 1.53 GHz on 133 MHz bus machines, so 1.50 GHz should be maximum on your Sawtooth. Either way, both "7451" and "1.6 GHz" seem (slightly) wrong.

> this must be a cpu with a massive L3 cache

Both 7451 and 7455 can support up to 2 MiB L3 cache, and according to the above-linked website, the 7455 on the card is fully equipped.

Lets bring back an old thread:
Quote:

Got a 2GHz PCIe and stand by is 2.7W which is similar to the AGP
Haven't really seen a difference between idle and use on this one, but there is this:

Radeon HD3650 -> 191W
Radeon R5 230 -> 170W (note, this card did not work with 3.19)

Giving how hot the 3650 was when I removed it I have no problem believing it using >30W (assuming the R5 is at least 10W).
All this with the 6600LE still installed.
Are the savings (up to 45W) from running the CPU at just 2GHz, improvements in HW or the 2nd core sleeping "better" than the 2nd CPU in an AGP?
Also noticed that the CPU stays in the 40s (with limited testing) while AGP and the iMac start there creep into the 50s even when idle and can easily reach 70° under load.
Power consumption under OSX (idle) is about 127W and in OF 170W (with the R5 installed) so there still some room for improvement.

Quote:

My Quad is eating around 280-300W so I'm really hoping for some improvement to show up :)

Well just send me one of your CPUs, that should help a bit ;)

I also checked the 34" AOC widescreen that I use for the "new" G5:

1.5W standby 29.5W in native 3440x1440

So less the 22" LG at double (or more) the area.

Yep, 17 years (give or take) will do that.