Sonnet PCI X Installer |
September, 01, 2002 1:23 PM |
stephan-kaps |
Hello, I have tried out both XPostFacto and the Sonnet PCI X Installer with my Umax S900 G3 450 and must say that 10.2 Jaguar runs really much faster with the Sonnet Software than with XPostFacto (yes, I have activated the cache under both installations). Did anybody of you try PCI X installer so far and can you confirm the speed difference? |
. |
RE: Sonnet PCI X Installer |
September, 07, 2002 8:13 PM |
OSXGuru |
. |
Ideally, the 9500 motherboard L2 cache should be disabled for best performance (once you have a CPU upgrade installed). Unfortunately, L2CacheConfig doesn't know how to do that. But the PowerLogix Cache Control software does do that, it seems, and some users have reported noticeable speed gains for that reason. |
. |
RE: Sonnet PCI X Installer |
September, 04, 2002 7:16 AM |
drc |
. |
Here's my two-bits worth & a stupid question. 1) I bought a Sonnet card (G4 467 MHz) for my 9500 specifically because Sonnet was producing their installer and they had a good reputation for making these things work. I never could get OS X to install. The first time I tried XPF it worked. I've never looked back. 2) The 9500 has some motherboard L2 cache. Should that be enabled or disabled to get maximum performance? |
. |
RE: Sonnet PCI X Installer |
September, 04, 2002 12:08 AM |
tempest |
. |
I would even use XPF if the Sonnet installer were faster just because XPF's source is available. I thank Ryan and OWC for that. It's unfortunate that legacy PowerMacs don't have their internals documented otherwise we will have fully working sound along with a host of other stuff. I'm amazed that XPF works as well as it does. Thanks Ryan & OWC. |
. |
RE: Sonnet PCI X Installer |
September, 03, 2002 11:23 PM |
dave |
. |
I've just blown most of the last two days trying to get Sonnets stuff to work - the install went a little faster (9500, Sonnet G3/400, Sonnet Tempo Trio, Radeon 7000) than with XPF, but have been completely unable to get the Sonnet software stable enough to use. Once installed, and when the Sonnet installed 10.2 boots, I can't tell the difference without benchmarks that I bet will be quite close. I'm back on XPF now, I've come to really appreciate this forum and the control we have over XPF that does not seem to be there in Sonnets installer (the reinstall extensions option was worth a couple of hours at least) |
. |
RE: Sonnet PCI X Installer |
September, 03, 2002 10:22 PM |
OSXGuru |
. |
I believe that is correct--the Sonnet installer will enable the L2 cache during the install. That will make the install somewhat speedier compared to XPostFacto. |
. |
RE: Sonnet PCI X Installer |
September, 03, 2002 8:19 PM |
john.england |
. |
I will try to reinstall 10.2 on a test partition using both methods and see what the differences are. It seems that Sonnet enables some type of caching as you reboot into the 10.2 install disk because it seems like a quicker installation too. Sonnet seems to use some type of internal setup for caching, it is not a separate, independant program like L2CacheConfig because when the installation is finished, caching is already enabled. |
. |
RE: Sonnet PCI X Installer |
September, 03, 2002 2:13 PM |
willschou1 |
. |
The S900/J700 Umax machines have non removable L2 cache on the motherboard. In order for these machines to run at full speed with a G3 /4 upgrade this cache has to be disabled. Powerlogix cache software works well and is the only known software to do so in OSX 10.2 with XPFacto. It is likely the Sonnet software when updated also does this. I would be interested in what cache software you were using with XPF. Stephan if not already a member you should join the Lowend Supermacs list. We have tried in vain to find someone who has used the Sonnet software and liked it. Most people had major trouble with installing it. and gave up. |
. |
RE: Sonnet PCI X Installer |
September, 03, 2002 8:16 AM |
pnoguchi |
. |
While I have not used the Sonnet installer, I have found that for OSX server under 10.2/XPF 2.2 that the powerlogix 2.1beta cache enable works, while lcache does not for activating cache. Interestingly, the first time I installed the powerlogix cache enabler, it said that the g3/400 was running at 130 mhz instead of 400 mhz. I wonder what that means. |
. |
RE: Sonnet PCI X Installer |
September, 02, 2002 11:30 PM |
OSXGuru |
. |
Are you using the same software to enable the L2 cache in both setups? I would be interested to know whether the difference was attributable to L2CacheConfig alone, or to XPostFacto itself. Also, is the difference only in startup speed, or is it persistent? XPostFacto will be somewhat slower at startup if you have the throttle set to anything but "None." |
. |
RE: Sonnet PCI X Installer |
September, 01, 2002 10:22 PM |
john.england |
. |
I'm using a G3/500 card and 10.2 is definitely faster under the Sonnet software. I have no idea why except several of Newertech's former engineers went to work for Sonnet. I'm guessing they brought some ideas about caching with them. |