Mac OS 9 Lives
Mac OS 9 Discussion => Hardware => Topic started by: supernova777 on January 24, 2014, 07:02:59 PM
-
OS9 POWERMAC G4 CHART
(excluding fw800 models that were previously thought not able to boot os9)
(http://www.macos9lives.com/downloads/_img/powermacG4_chart.PNG)
*agp macs below the digital audio model feature AGP 2x / digital audio and up feature AGP 4x
*As noted later in the thread there is a mistake in this chart (Based on a mistake int he info of everymac.com)
the 1.25 mdd single processor model does not feature 2MB backside cache
the 5 models that feature the 256k on chip L2/2mb backside L3 cache are:
1.25 DP MDD, 1.0 DP QS 2002, 800mhz DP QS, 933mhz QS, 867mhz QS
http://www.everymac.com/systems/apple/powermac_g4/specs/powermac_g4_1.25_dp_mdd.html
http://www.everymac.com/systems/apple/powermac_g4/specs/powermac_g4_1ghz_dp_qs.html
http://www.everymac.com/systems/apple/powermac_g4/specs/powermac_g4_800_dp_qs.html
http://www.everymac.com/systems/apple/powermac_g4/specs/powermac_g4_933_qs.html
http://www.everymac.com/systems/apple/powermac_g4/specs/powermac_g4_867_qs.html
450 DP, 500 DP, 533 DA feature no "on chip" cache
while the 733 QS, 800 QS feature no "backside" cache
the 3 macs with 167mhz bus are:
1.25 SP MDD (2003), 1.0ghz DP MDD (2002), 1.25 DP MDD (2002)
grey horizontal lines dont mean anything other then those are the particular models that i acquired
-
There is a little error in your chart, I think.
The MDD 2003 1.25 single has 1Mb L3. Optionaly it could be purchased with dual 1.25 and this came with 2Mb L3 per CPU.
Only one dual 1.25 was made with 1Mb L3 per CPU and it came into FW800 models.
The others dual 1.25 have 2Mb L3 per CPU.
Those single and dual 1.25 that came with MDD 2003, alongside 1.42 from FW800 usually are 7455B and are the best for overclock. The others are 7455A.
I hope I explained well. May be a bit confusing...
You can add to the chart −if you like− :
− Digital Audio and QuickSilver don't have native audio imput.
− From Gigabit onwards all have 24v line for ADC.
− Only MDD and QuickSilver have AGP 4x and 48bit support for HD ( on QuickSilver this is only on the last models)
-
There is a little error in your chart, I think.
The MDD 2003 1.25 single has 1Mb L3. Optionaly it could be purchased with dual 1.25 and this came with 2Mb L3 per CPU.
Only one dual 1.25 was made with 1Mb L3 per CPU and it came into FW800 models.
The others dual 1.25 have 2Mb L3 per CPU.
Those single and dual 1.25 that came with MDD 2003, alongside 1.42 from FW800 usually are 7455B and are the best for overclock. The others are 7455A.
i will double check!
− Only MDD and QuickSilver have AGP 4x and 48bit support for HD ( on QuickSilver this is only on the last models)
I would guess the Dual 800 QS And the 933 QS....... (the units with same cpu type as MDD : "7455")
err so wait.. the 867mhz QS is AGP 2x?? not 4x?
http://www.everymac.com/systems/apple/powermac_g4/specs/powermac_g4_867_qs.html <-- this says 4x
http://www.everymac.com/systems/apple/powermac_g4/specs/powermac_g4_733_qs.html <-- this says 4x
oh wait.. u meant ATA-100 disk ! not 4x.. ok.;)
everymac says that no qs has ATA-100.. maybe the 48-bit support was added initially in ATA-66 connection? and is not documented clearly?
-
hmm i was just offered a 533 digital audio that isnt booting up properly for $20 (1 beep, which means bad ram)
clearly his power supply works.. so what i was thinking is to put my QS 867mhz inside the Digital audio 533mhz board + case
to have my 867mhz cpu + 2mb L3 cache.... and have a working machine again and still have 4 pci slots..... fixed for $20 is not bad
(http://www.macos9lives.com/downloads/_img/gigabit_psu.PNG) (http://www.macos9lives.com/downloads/_img/qs_psu.PNG)
theres no way i would want to modify the psu to QSpin out
actually they are pretty damn close!!!!!!
the extra 4 pins at the bottom, is this soley for the extra cpu power to the chip do u think?
I think the +25v line goes to the monitor...
-
There is a little error in your chart, I think.
The MDD 2003 1.25 single has 1Mb L3. Optionaly it could be purchased with dual 1.25 and this came with 2Mb L3 per CPU.
http://www.everymac.com/systems/apple/powermac_g4/specs/powermac_g4_1.25_mdd.html this page says 2mb L3 Cache..
is it everymac who is wrong?
-
There is a little error in your chart, I think.
The MDD 2003 1.25 single has 1Mb L3. Optionaly it could be purchased with dual 1.25 and this came with 2Mb L3 per CPU.
http://www.everymac.com/systems/apple/powermac_g4/specs/powermac_g4_1.25_mdd.html this page says 2mb L3 Cache..
is it everymac who is wrong?
Yes.
http://support.apple.com/kb/sp106
-
so..
in retrospect 5 models only..
the only g4 macs that had 2MB L3 CACHE:
ranked from slowest to fastest cpu power:
single cpus:
-G4 867 (QS) (2001) 133mhz bus >>> 487
-G4 933 (QS) (2002) 133mhz bus >>> 550
dual cpus:
-G4 800 DP (QS) (2001) 133mhz bus >>> 670 (335 per?)
-G4 1.0 DP (QS) (2002) 133mhz bus >>> 854 (427 per?)
-G4 1.25 DP (MDD) (2002) 167mhz bus >>> 1078 (539 per?)
so in conclusion the 2002 1.25ghz dual processor MDD is the fastest stock os9 computer ever made
the only 167mhz bus + only one with both 2MB L3 Cache as well as ATA-100 disk speed access
on the main IDE bus
addendum:
ive just rechecked the fact that the Sonnet Encore (Single) CPUs feature level 3 cache up to the 1.4ghz models
here are the infos / part numbers from the pdf:
(http://www.macos9lives.com/downloads/_img/sonnet_upgrades.png)
SG4-1000-2M 1.0 GHz 256KB 2MB
SG4-1200-2M 1.2 GHz 256KB 2MB
SG4-C1200 1.2 GHz 256KB 2MB
G4-1400-2M 1.4 GHz 256KB 2MB
not sure what the diff is between the two 1.2ghz models
with this new (old) information.. does this mean the 1.4ghz sonnet is the fastest single g4 cpu that also has 2MB L3 Cache?
perhaps.
**** remember these SONNET cpu upgrades being compatible with 100mhz + 133mhz fsb g4s EXCLUDING the MDD of course:
Power Mac G4 (AGP Graphics)
Power Mac G4 (Gigabit Ethernet)
Power Mac G4 (Digital Audio)
Power Mac G4 (QuickSilver 2001)
Power Mac G4 (QuickSilver 2002)
Power Mac G4 Cube*
Macintosh Server G4
perhaps this whole "Cube" enthusiast movement relies heavily on the fact that the g4 cube could be upgraded to 1.4ghz sonnet cpu with 2mb l3 cache
-
so in conclusion the 2002 1.25ghz dual processor MDD is the fastest stock os9 computer ever made
the only 167mhz bus + only one with both 2MB L3 Cache as well as ATA-100 disk speed access
on the main IDE bus
...and not very well known: double PCI Bus!
One PCI bus inside the U2 uninorth for Ata 100, gigabit Ethernet, AGP (4x) and Firewire, and all those subsystems with DMA to DDR RAM!! and the other PCI Bus for the other components: Ata 66/33, USB, PCI slots...
-
wouldnt this double pci bus be on the other mdd's aswell tho? (ie: any MDD that has ATA100 as well as ATA 66?)
-
***update
i was in contact with kyle brock of everymac.com today and he thanked me for informing him of the 1mb l3 cache on 2003 1.25 mdd..
after i showed him this apple update + thread so the info is corrected now i think on everymac.com listing
http://www.everymac.com/systems/apple/powermac_g4/specs/powermac_g4_1.25_mdd.html
-
just a note: the 2003 1.25ghz mdd (1mb L3 cache, incorrectly reffered to as 2MB) is noted as achieving a score of 727 on the above chart.
i have acquired one of these machines and just silenced the fans in the psu ;) and u can check its score
on my geekbench account: http://browser.primatelabs.com/user/chrisnova777/geekbench2
(click geekbench2 scores tab) and you will see this machine scores 779 and 780 consistantly when i test it.
-
http://www.oldschooldaw.com/forums/index.php?topic=389.msg409#msg409
here i've created a chronological chart to view the new world rom powermac desktops
ordered by release date
8)
-
(http://macos9lives.com/smforum/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=578.0;attach=1405;image)
-
i really need to update this chart to include the g4 fw800 models now i guess huh? :D
of the fw800 models, do any of them have 2MB cache? (i forget)
-
per your question on what QS models have the 128GB HDD limit:
there was once one page on this site, which listed the part numbers of the logicboards and the specific models in which it was put in.
I remember that page had all info one need at first to get started with OS 9 installation. It had a picture of a coffin and a HDD with an orange 9 on it and other nice icons.
I don't know, where that site has gone, but there you would find the answer.
Also, the reintroduced Single 1,25GHz MDD of 2003 was available BTO with DP 1,25GHz and still OS 9 bootable, would that very last DP model (without FW800! Though 2003) have the L3 cache, too?
Edit: found it differently and in another place:
QuickSilver 733, QuickSilver 800, QuickSilver DP 800, QuickSilver 867, QuickSilver 933, QuickSilver Dual 1 GHz with logic board 820-1342-B (QS logic board 820-1276-A will NOT work and peak out at 128 GB),
-
Also, the reintroduced Single 1,25GHz MDD of 2003 was available BTO with DP 1,25GHz and still OS 9 bootable, would that very last DP model (without FW800! Though 2003) have the L3 cache, too?
Both models of the dual 1.25 MDD FW400 of course had the L3 Cache...but the amount of L3 cache is what started the debate
The Original Dual 1.25 Ghz. (2002 thru Jan 2003): http://www.everymac.com/systems/apple/powermac_g4/specs/powermac_g4_1.25_dp_mdd.html
Built to Order Dual 1.25 Ghz. (2003 Thru June 2004): http://www.everymac.com/systems/apple/powermac_g4/specs/powermac_g4_1.25_mdd.html
But the distinction is that this later re-issued model (2003 thru Jan 2004), only has 1 MB cache per CPU whether it is a single CPU model or a Dual Built to Order model, still only 1 MB cache per processor.
Now as discussed in previous posts, there are different reasons why many members here have either swapped out the stock 167 Mhz Bus compatible CPU, or overclocked it.
Users that are OS9 only may choose a single CPU; depending on the DAW host application, a single will run both cooler and more stable (with some OS 9 based applications), so the optimal CPU (without overclocking) is the fastest single with the most cache...
http://www.everymac.com/systems/apple/xserve/specs/xserve_g4_1.33.html
Rip one out of an Xserve G4 1.33 and BAM... single cool CPU, runs at 1.33 Ghz. and has 2 MB Cache
Or overclock a stock single CPU to 1.5 Ghz
...While users that use both OS X and OS 9 will opt to rip a Dual 1.42 Processor board out of a FW 800 and put it in their 2003 MDD
and BAM, Dual 1.42 Ghz monster with 2 MB cache per CPU
-
Thanks!
I didn't mean that it doesn't have L3 cache at all, but if the 2003 MDD Dual 1,25GHz reissue BTO version had the 2MB L3 per CPU, i.e. 2x2MB L3.
...
Users that are OS9 only may choose a single CPU; depending on the DAW host application, a single will run both cooler and more stable (with some OS 9 based applications), so the optimal CPU (without overclocking) is the fastest single with the most cache...
http://www.everymac.com/systems/apple/xserve/specs/xserve_g4_1.33.html
Rip one out of an Xserve G4 1.33 and BAM... single cool CPU, runs at 1.33 Ghz. and has 2 MB Cache
Or overclock a stock single CPU to 1.5 Ghz
...While users that use both OS X and OS 9 will opt to rip a Dual 1.42 Processor board out of a FW 800 and put it in their 2003 MDD
and BAM, Dual 1.42 Ghz monster with 2 MB cache per CPU
Let us see, if I understand, what you are saying:
We have (all ever built):
August 2002
1. Power Mac G4 867 DP MDD, 133Mhz FSB, 1MB L3 per Core
2. Power Mac G4 1.0 DP MDD , 167MHz FSB, "
3. Power Mac G4 1.25 DP MDD, 167MHz FSB, 2MB L3 per Core
January 2003
4. Power Mac G4 1.0 FW800, 133Mhz FSB, 1MB L3 per Core
5. Power Mac G4 1.25 DP FW800, 167MHz FSB, "
6. Power Mac G4 1.42 DP FW800, 167MHz FSB, 2MB L3 per Core
June 2003
7. Power Mac G4 1.25 MDD ("reissue"), 167MHz FSB, 1MB L3 per Core
8. Power Mac G4 1.25 DP MDD BTO ("reissue"), 167MHz FSB, 1MB L3 per Core
Xserve
9. Xserve G4 lower than 1.33GHz, 133MHz FSB, 2MB L3 per core
10. Xserve G4 1.33GHz Dual and Single, 167MHz FSB, 2MB L3 per core
So, if I want to have the best OS 9 machine:
a) get "7" = 1,25GHz G4 single, 167MHz cache, 1MB L3 cache and overclock to 1,5GHz (to get highest CPU clock + highest FSB)
b) get "7" and put in "10" = Single 1,33GHz G4 Xserve CPU, 167MHz FSB, 2MB L3 per core (to get highest CPU clock + highest FSB + biggest L3 cache)
So, if I want the best OS X + OS 9 bootable machine:
a) take CPU from "6" and put in 2, 3, 7 or 8
b) second best, take CPU 1,33GHz Dual out of Xserve and put in 2, 3, 7 or 8 (but will run cooler.
The Xserve CPU runs cooler at a similar clock speed, is it not slower? if we can trust Geekbench, I mean a 2x1,8GHz 7447 is just as fast as a 1.42GHz DP 7455...:
Looking at geekbench (all Dual CPU):
Xserve 1.33: 1200
PM 1.25: 1074
PM 1.42: 1224
-> Hm, seems not, if we can trust geekbench.
-
We have (all ever built):
August 2002
1. Power Mac G4 867 DP MDD, 133Mhz FSB, 1MB L3 per Core
2. Power Mac G4 1.0 DP MDD , 167MHz FSB, "
3. Power Mac G4 1.25 DP MDD, 167MHz FSB, 2MB L3 per Core
January 2003
4. Power Mac G4 1.0 FW800, 133Mhz FSB, 1MB L3 per Core
5. Power Mac G4 1.25 DP FW800, 167MHz FSB, "
6. Power Mac G4 1.42 DP FW800, 167MHz FSB, 2MB L3 per Core
June 2003
7. Power Mac G4 1.25 MDD ("reissue"), 167MHz FSB, 1MB L3 per Core
8. Power Mac G4 1.25 DP MDD BTO ("reissue"), 167MHz FSB, 1MB L3 per Core
Xserve
9. Xserve G4 lower than 1.33GHz, 133MHz FSB, 2MB L3 per core
10. Xserve G4 1.33GHz Dual and Single, 167MHz FSB, 2MB L3 per core
So, if I want to have the best OS 9 machine:
a) get "7" = 1,25GHz G4 single, 167MHz cache, 1MB L3 cache and overclock to 1,5GHz (to get highest CPU clock + highest FSB)
b) get "7" and put in "10" = Single 1,33GHz G4 Xserve CPU, 167MHz FSB, 2MB L3 per core (to get highest CPU clock + highest FSB + biggest L3 cache)
I do not understand. Why are you excluding all DP machines for OS 9 completely? OK the system isn´t using the 2nd CPU but some applications like Photoshop can. And still the 2MB cache are there for the CPU in permanent use.
So as stock machine 3 should still be the fastest for native Mac OS 9 boot.
As modded machine a 3 or 7 with a 1,42CPU from 6 should be the fastest native Mac OS 9 bootable machine.
-
I do not understand. Why are you excluding all DP machines for OS 9 completely? OK the system isn´t using the 2nd CPU but some applications like Photoshop can.
Because DieHard said
Users that are OS9 only may choose a single CPU; depending on the DAW host application, a single will run both cooler and more stable (with some OS 9 based applications), so the optimal CPU (without overclocking) is the fastest single with the most cache...
and I was assuming that the OSX+OS9 reccomendation by DieHard can be used for OS9 Dual CPU usage, too - i.e. the recommendation for OS-X + OS 9 would be the same as for a User who e.g. uses Photoshop in OS 9, only.
(is it "was assuming" or "assumed"?)
-
I may be crazy, but doesn't Digital Performer utilize both procs on dual machines in OS9? I seem to recall them bragging about that in an ad...?
Anyone?
-
I do not understand. Why are you excluding all DP machines for OS 9 completely? OK the system isn´t using the 2nd CPU but some applications like Photoshop can.
Because DieHard said
DieHard is right, but you were talking about the fastest, and not about the coolest and most stable Mac Os 9 machine like he recommended the single CPU Macs for ;)
And GaryN you are right. I made a new thread with software that uses both CPUs.
-
So, if I want to have the best OS 9 machine:
a) get "7" = 1,25GHz G4 single, 167MHz cache, 1MB L3 cache and overclock to 1,5GHz (to get highest CPU clock + highest FSB)
b) get "7" and put in "10" = Single 1,33GHz G4 Xserve CPU, 167MHz FSB, 2MB L3 per core (to get highest CPU clock + highest FSB + biggest L3 cache)
The "b" option is my favorite. But with the the single 1,33GHz G4 Xserve CPU overclocked to 1.5 Ghz, plus a Ti4600 and a SSD ... ;D
http://macos9lives.com/smforum/index.php?topic=1726.msg8203#msg8203
if we can trust Geekbench, I mean a 2x1,8GHz 7447 is just as fast as a 1.42GHz DP 7455...:
That's false. A 2x1,8GHz 7447 is just as fast as a 1.66GHz DP 7455, but faster than a 1.42 GHz DP 7455. I had posted the data somewhere...
-
From Mactron...
The "b" option is my favorite. But with the the single 1,33GHz G4 Xserve CPU overclocked to 1.5 Ghz, plus a Ti4600 and a SSD ... ;D
This is also my current config. on my 3 OS 9 MDDs (but No Overclocking), Since I could not source the CPUs only, I bought 3 XServes on ebay (all for less than $60) and pulled the CPUs...
Remember, Mactron and I are both CuBase VST 5/32 users on OS 9, so we opt for the Single/Cool/Fast CPU flavor, also, Mactron converted me to TI4600, and we both use SSDs...
-
I had a question, so I hope no one mind this thread getting bumped:
One thing I've had great difficulty verifying is a complete, correct way of properly identifying individual revisions of motherboards by part number or otherwise within a particular model. One good example of this that I do know well-enough is the rev 1 vs rev 2 B&W G3 boards issue which affects the ATA controller. While it is important to know the specifics of an already assembled system, individual motherboard revisions can have differing abilities that are key from a functionality standpoint when buying replacement parts or trying to outfit a particular case with the best possible version. Other stand-out issues are rev 1 QS G4 not supporting large ATA drives, and the varying abilities and bus speeds of the numerous MDD and FW800 boards.
Does anyone here have the expertise to create charts for at least the MDD and QS detailing how to clearly and correctly identify each motherboard revision available, what unique abilities each one has, and what the shipping ROM version would be? Clear photos of each version would also be greatly appreciated. Perhaps this could be cross-referenced to the tower model numbers that would have used them. I know this is all tricky because there are numerous production sequence codes that apply to boards of the same revision, and that multiple PCB model numbers reference the same revision board.
-
Does anyone here have the expertise to create charts for at least the MDD and QS detailing how to clearly and correctly identify each motherboard revision available, what unique abilities each one has, and what the shipping ROM version would be?
Lot of folks here capable of creating a clear readable chart. Problem is, who's got the data?
Garbage in, garbage out…
-
Well, from the many QS & MDD Boards I have seen (minus logic board 820-1276-A that peaks out at 128 GB); functionality is pretty much the same across the board for Logic boards that have the same bus speed, so I am unsure of exactly what you want documented. Back in the day, I benched QS boards that came out of every model (including "educational" units w/crazy part numbers) and I even had 2 Apple "prototype Red MBs" and all benched pretty much equally and had no fuctional differences. As far as MDDs, Mactron and I compared some notes and again... no real differences to document.
There is one note worth mentioning to people that "Overclock" MDDs from Mactron that certain CPU daughter boards overclock much better than others, but he is the overclock expert :) So for more info, contact him.
-
Here you can find some extra info:
http://macos9lives.com/smforum/index.php?topic=2903.msg18351#msg18351 (http://macos9lives.com/smforum/index.php?topic=2903.msg18351#msg18351)
And here about MDDs CPU modules:
(http://macos9lives.com/smforum/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=587.0;attach=574)
-
All very good info, thanks. What I was trying to get at is there are many part numbers for the motherboards, but they are generally grouped into revisions, and I would like to be able to easily identify these revisions by some printed number on the board when I am looking at buying parts or whole systems on eBay or other online stores. One website that sells replacement parts refers to three different revisions of MDD board in addition to the FW800 versions. And of course also there are the earlier and later revisions of the QS motherboards, the earlier one not supporting 48-bit drive access. Trying to get accurate information about a particular item from a seller can often be next to impossible.
My concern is that even if performance is generally the same within a given group, revisions had to have occurred for a reason. There may have been bug fixes, documented or not. A few bugs are well known in G3 boards that could not be resolved with firmware updates, as in the reason for and desirability of the rev.2 B&W boards. I am mostly concerned with the potential for problems with the ATA controllers and general PCI bus behavior. I've crashed every Mac I've ever owned due to all sorts of hardware 'voodoo' and messing around with high-performance add-ons. Knowing whether or not I have the last revision motherboard for a particular model gives me a good idea if a specific configuration is truly a no-go for all revisions. Many of these different boards have different base firmware versions, and we all know how various Apple firmware versions can have serious potential impacts on a system.
-
From MacOS Plus..
I am mostly concerned with the potential for problems with the ATA controllers and general PCI bus behavior. I've crashed every Mac I've ever owned due to all sorts of hardware 'voodoo' and messing around with high-performance add-ons. Knowing whether or not I have the last revision motherboard for a particular model gives me a good idea if a specific configuration is truly a no-go for all revisions. Many of these different boards have different base firmware versions, and we all know how various Apple firmware versions can have serious potential impacts on a system.
I have prepped over 800+ QS and MDD units and I assure you that the issues you are describing almost non-existent in these models (unless you have a hardware issue). A much more real concern would be modifications (search our forum) to MDD units to quiet them down. QS 933 is the "quiet" choice, but obviously the MDD can provide about 30% more horsepower for Virtual instruments and other taxing software. Also, as pointed out many times, on the software level, extensions can accidentally load in the same memory space and cause conflicts/crashes, but these issues will be at startup and will be sorted out pretty easily... no re-installs, no windows registry, just track down turning extensions on or off.
There are no ATA issues, no crazy rouge firmware versions to stay clear of. I have added many 3rd party software/hardware extensions to the system and the "rare" incompatibility issues are NOT unique to a logic board rev. when you are working with the MDD & QS models.
-
Thank-you very much. This is very helpful input and definitely the level of informed experience I was hoping to hear from. Also, you previously noted the early-rev QS part number of the board with the drive size limit, which will serve me well in my purchasing 'escapades'. Coincidently, the only QS I own is that same one you noted. I will carry on testing my existing systems with confidence.
-
:) Happy computing
-
Hey, MacTron, I think there's one minor typo in your CPU chart. In the MDD 2003 dual CPU, the second CPU speed rating says 1.24 instead of 1.25. Are all the MDD and xServe CPU modules technically interchangeable? (Keeping in mind the bus speed, of course, and alternate heatsinks required in the xServe too.) I know the compact Sonnet unit fits both.
-
Hey, MacTron, I think there's one minor typo in your CPU chart. In the MDD 2003 dual CPU, the second CPU speed rating says 1.24 instead of 1.25.
OK thank you.
Are all the MDD and xServe CPU modules technically interchangeable? (Keeping in mind the bus speed, of course, and alternate heatsinks required in the xServe too.) I know the compact Sonnet unit fits both.
Yes, the MDD and xServe CPU modules are fully interchangeable. In fact the xServe G4@1333 single, is my favourite for MDD, Because being single, it runs cooler and have 2Mb of L3 caché, I have two happily running at 1.5 Ghz ;)
Do a search about all of this, if you like.
-
But are the XServe Slotloading cpu boards swappable with the ones in a 2003 (The OS9 reedition) Single 1.25GHz MDD?
I'm looking to buy one (if you know someone or some shop in Europe that does sell them please advise), but I also have no idea on what to do regarding the Cooling, so if you have any pointers, they'd be most appreciated.
-
Apple Xserve G4/1.33 (Slot Load)
http://www.everymac.com/systems/apple/xserve/specs/xserve_g4_1.33.html
As Mactron mentioned, the CPU Board works 100% compatible. I use the stock cooler and it runs fine. I have 4 MDDs all running the 1.33 singles. I recommend if you are using OS9 only to use this model that is a single (it runs cooler). If you are running OSX also then go for the:
Apple Xserve G4/1.33 DP (Slot Load)
http://www.everymac.com/systems/apple/xserve/specs/xserve_g4_1.33_dp.html
If you go DP then purchase a Copper Cooler for the MDD
-
@Supernova
one additional fact for your list:
According to everymac.com the are three QS models that came with two CPU-types at the same time. I assume they were short of chips and took some older ones. They come either with 7455 or 7450.
https://everymac.com/systems/apple/powermac_g4/index-powermac-g4.html (see for the asterisc and the info in each QS's single spec sheet, when you expand the CPU entry on everymac.com's single QS's spec sheets.)
Models, look at attachment.
-
that info cant be accurate.. noone has ever seen a 7450 type cpu that is 933mhz or 1.0 ghz??
from what i know to be true at least
everymac.com has been known to have alot of hard to find mistakes
but yes.. it seems like i left out the dual 1ghz quicksilver when i made this chart
https://everymac.com/systems/apple/powermac_g4/specs/powermac_g4_1ghz_dp_qs.html
actually no? its in there.. just says DP QS near the bottom