[-1984-]

Some has told me that the 8600/250 is better to upgrade to a G3 or G4 than faster 8600s or even 9600s. Supposedly this is because the Mach 5 board in the faster 8600/9600s uses a special cache technology that is undesirable with a G3/G4 which has its own cache, and can't use the Mach 5 hi speed cache bus technology. There are also alleged memory related issues with a G3/G4 combined with a Mach 5 board where the memory is actually slowed down.

Can anyone verify this for me? It sounds questionable to me.

Thanks--you folks are the best.

[sodamnregistered]

Originally posted by -1984-:
<STRONG>Some has told me that the 8600/250 is better to upgrade to a G3 or G4 than faster 8600s or even 9600s. Supposedly this is because the Mach 5 board in the faster 8600/9600s uses a special cache technology that is undesirable with a G3/G4 which has its own cache, and can't use the Mach 5 hi speed cache bus technology. There are also alleged memory related issues with a G3/G4 combined with a Mach 5 board where the memory is actually slowed down.

Can anyone verify this for me? It sounds questionable to me.

Thanks--you folks are the best.</STRONG>

A weak reply I know, but something like that is true. The Mach5 was a finicky speed grab at the end of the 604e.

I have a 9500 with a Newer G3/400 1MB card in it. Had to disable the onboard 512k cache but runs great. Use it for accounting and SCSI CD-R copying.

The 9500 series computers want you to match DIMMS to take advantage of memory interleaving. But it's not a deal breaker if you don't do this.

[kbbaucom]

The 8600/250 IS a Mach 5 processor. I think I have heard of problems with the 9600 and G3 upgrades relating to the dual PCI bus (some cards not working on the second bus). I have an 8600/250, with XLR8 MACh Carrier G3 400 ZIF, and 512 MB of interleaved RAM. I haven't had any problems at all with it. I get about 50% better memory performance with the G3 than with the 604e.