best 478 motherbord for pulsar??help

mode · Post by **mode** » Sat Nov 11, 2006 12:37 pm

there is no way that i can use my pulsar 2 with my sismotherbord,ive list all hope.
can any one please recommend me a tested 478 mother bord,with agpx8
only 100% working i dont what 2 waste any mony with no result
any good tip will b helpfull

i have pulsar 2 and luna for 2 years or more still cant use it out of sync

see my last posts for backround ive done it all
its about time to get a new bord cant wait to use my modular

peace out

dawman · Post by **dawman** » Sat Nov 11, 2006 12:44 pm

D865PERL will hunt.

Post by **garyb** » Sat Nov 11, 2006 5:10 pm

agree. intel d865perl

mode · Post by **mode** » Sun Nov 12, 2006 8:34 am

ill post more when ill have my pulsar mod working
tnx alot its in to the trash bin with my sis bord(maby ill paint it in blue and sink it in the sea,so no one will have to go what ive been thrue)

kylie · Post by **kylie** » Mon Nov 13, 2006 5:18 am

stardust wrote:Asus CUSL 2C or TUSL 2c depending on the processor frequency.
TUSL will allow also Tualatin P3s

P3 comes in FC-PGA2 if I'm not totally wrong...

I can recommend the Asus P4C800-E DLX. but I'm sure the D865PERL will do as well...

-greetings, markus-

astroman · Post by **astroman** » Mon Nov 13, 2006 6:21 am

I have the TUSL2-c, it came with a Celeron 1.3G. Since it performed well I considered it worth investing in a Tualatin 1.2 (new old stock).
Regarding Scope there is no difference, so one could spare the top-of-the-line P3 CPU .
One or the other native app may benefit, tho, but for the 'classical' Scope synth/FX extender box there's no advantage.
The biggest drawback is that the board can only adress 512MB - afaik it's a hardware (adressing) limit - and of course it's a different CPU socket.

cheers, Tom

dawman · Post by **dawman** » Mon Nov 13, 2006 10:10 pm

I saw this SFP DAW running a Supermicro board with a Tualitin 1.4GHz w/ 512 L2 cache that worked very well, and was very quiet. I believe that last model of that CPU was used in the Pentium M, and Yonah, and even the current Core 2 Duo architechture. The pentium 4's don't impress me as much as the AMD's did. But the Intel chipsets that came with the 4's were as dependable as the sunrise in the eastern sky.

Jimmy V.

ali · Post by **ali** » Tue Nov 14, 2006 9:29 am

astroman wrote:I have the TUSL2-c, it came with a Celeron 1.3G. Since it performed well I considered it worth investing in a Tualatin 1.2 (new old stock).
Regarding Scope there is no difference, so one could spare the top-of-the-line P3 CPU .
One or the other native app may benefit, tho, but for the 'classical' Scope synth/FX extender box there's no advantage.
The biggest drawback is that the board can only adress 512MB - afaik it's a hardware (adressing) limit - and of course it's a different CPU socket.

cheers, Tom

I have 2 x TUSL2-c systems with 1.0 celeron clocked to 1.3 and they out perform my 2200+ AMD (nforce2) in term of stability. so far they never crashed.
these mainboards are well made. too bad they don't make them like this anymore

astroman · Post by **astroman** » Tue Nov 14, 2006 9:53 am

when I looked for one on ebay I found some bidders in every auction with a TUSL involved, like buying out the market...

cheers, Tom

Post by **garyb** » Tue Nov 14, 2006 10:46 am

the 815 chipset was great. the 865 and 965 chipsets have been equally stable for me.

CarvinGuitarFreak · Post by **CarvinGuitarFreak** » Tue Nov 14, 2006 10:51 am

Hi,
I use a ABIT IC7 with 2xP2 and 1xLuna. It works great, not IRQ conflicts. Great MB, IMHO but getting old. Cheap on Ebay

.

Later
CGF

ARCADIOS · Post by **ARCADIOS** » Tue Nov 14, 2006 4:36 pm

asus p4c800e. ok. 875p chipset
abit ic7g. ok 875p chipset

kylie · Post by **kylie** » Wed Nov 15, 2006 7:48 am

astroman wrote: Regarding Scope there is no difference, so one could spare the top-of-the-line P3 CPU .
One or the other native app may benefit, tho, but for the 'classical' Scope synth/FX extender box there's no advantage.

well, if you can afford to have an array of single-purpose computers, this may be the way to go, but if room and cash are limited resources one might better invest in a more recent multi-purpose machine.

but there's also the noise factor, and I agree that the great old ones are not only stable but easily silenced.

not an easy decision...

astroman · Post by **astroman** » Wed Nov 15, 2006 10:00 am

that quote above referred to the 815 board only - it's an excellent board regarding stability, configuration and PCI performance - but not so good with memory, as that's limited to 512 MB unfortunately (regardless of the OS).

I originally paid 65 Euro for the Mobo, Celeron 1.3G CPU and 256 MB Ram
the additional investment in a Tualatin and fast SDRam 133/222 changed the Scope performance at best marginally, if at all.

If the main purpose is to make Scope accessible to a (say) an OSX system or an existing complex sequencer setup, it's not worth the extra expense.

But I'd prefer such an (external) cheap and silent box any time over the risk to mess with XP...

I never suffer from midi buffer crashes - my (meanwhile) 3 Pulsar Ones have 36 channels of Adat to communicate with... and I never need a software update on that box.

Of course it's not necessary to go back to the 815 - though there are tons of cheapo HPs and Dells with that chipset on sale...

A P4 with socket 478 isn't much more expensive anyway, even with a quality mobo, the famous Intel 865 PERL.
As a sidenote (I've had the Pulsar in an 865 also for some time), the P3 system is less noisy - can't really tell why, same case and same poweroutlet, but the difference is between 4 and 6 db on empty analog ins.
This may not apply to 2nd generation Scope cards, though

A 19" industrial rack case, a quality PSU and CPU fan add up to 200-300 Euro, making mobo, cpu and ram almost neglectable in the calculation.

cheers, Tom

PlanetZ forums - scopeusers.com

best 478 motherbord for pulsar??help

best 478 motherbord for pulsar??help

ty all for the input,ill get the intel d865perl