Sorry I never kept notes on what chipsets have failed, Just on what workscordel wrote:Via, SiS, and some Nvidia chipsets are known to have issues with the BT878 and like chips, so much so that in some cases, the machine will not even post with a capture card installed so this is not a driver/Library issue.
cordel wrote:Sorry I never kept notes on what chipsets have failed, Just on what workscordel wrote:Via, SiS, and some Nvidia chipsets are known to have issues with the BT878 and like chips, so much so that in some cases, the machine will not even post with a capture card installed so this is not a driver/Library issue.
ZM itself is not written for multi-core support per se, and more importantly the compilers used to compile it will generally not be optimised for that. However that really only makes a huge difference if you had some monolithic application that consumed a lot of CPU in which case you might have 1 CPU at 100% and the others at less (or zero!). Because ZM uses multiple processes all doing different things then some of them will be running on one CPU and some on the others so in that respect you do get an advantage.linuxoid wrote:ZM is not written to utilize dual or quad core, is it? so I guess there will be little gain in using them if at all. Dual cores for a whole operating system - yes. Quad cores - not yet, can't think of any application which would run much faster on these than on dual cores.
Nope. A dell business class workstation. Furthermore, we ordered it with an Intel chipset. It seems Dell doesn't understand the difference between CPUs and chipsets either.curtishall wrote:Not to get off topic....but here we go
Was the Dell system a 'server' motherboard?
Lee Sharp wrote:Many analog capture cards have a fundamental incompatibility with non Intel chipsets. I had one Dell system refuse to post with the cards installed. So, if there is a chance of ever having a capture card installed, I will only go Intel. And since we buy many systems at a time for many purposes, it is just easier to get Intel if there is doubt. But I also have several miniATX Via systems, and they are not Intel. They also are not video servers.
It does not happen a lot, and occasionally the board will boot and run, just have odd stability issues. I have had it on several non-intel chipsets, and Never on an Intel chipset. That is enough for me not to jack with it. It takes too much time that I can't bill for, and I have a workable solution.linuxoid wrote:Ah, issues with chipsets not CPUs make sense. Obviously you can only have an Intel chipset with an Intel CPU. Could you please tell me what VIA and nVidia chipsets you had troubles with? I'll try to avoid them if possible. And I stay clear off AMD/ATI chipsets no matter what.
Not directly, but it uses a lot of different components that often are. There are big gains with multi-core.linuxoid wrote:ZM is not written to utilize dual or quad core, is it? so I guess there will be little gain in using them if at all. Dual cores for a whole operating system - yes. Quad cores - not yet, can't think of any application which would run much faster on these than on dual cores.
Not if the problem prevents passing post. That is the screen before the boot menu, and before the MVR is read. In my case it would not boot the Windows on the disk, or any rescue disk I had (UBCD, UBCD4WIN, Ubuntu, Freeesbie) which eliminates drivers...linuxoid wrote:It's always a driver issue. you need a driver for any piece of hardware or chip. if nvidia chipset has problems with bt878 chips, it's either an nvidia nforce or bt878 driver issue.so this is not a driver/Library issue
This is further off topic, but you asked...linuxoid wrote:ummm, I think I'm going off topic myself. Let's concentrate on ZM and CPU/chipset/bt878 compatibility. Do you have any other technical reasons against or in favor of any CPU or chipset in particular?
AMD at one time would not stand behind a defective OEM CPU. This was escalated and AMD just said "Tough." My vendor (Directron) covered it anyway. They said it happened far too often, and AMD was one of the worst. (But they also had some choice comments about a specific hard drive brand. Funny enough the other brand owned by the same company didn't have this problem...)
it was way much easier than I thought. If did I only think of that before or paid more attention. I believe port 80 is being blocked by my ISP, as soon as I forwarded LAN port 80 to WAN port 81 - everything started working honky dory! And dyndns updates my router LAN address instead of actual IP, that is there's no need to install anything as robi said. Thank you all for your help.
