|
|
| Author |
Message |
pablo
|
|
P200MMX vs. K6?
| 
Nov 13 13:43 UTC 1997 |
Hi to everybody!
I have hand-made P100 and plan to upgrade. There are two considerable
alternatives: P200MMX and K6-PR2-200. Heard that K6 has better price/quality
value, but scared of incompatible stuff.
If someone runs K6, please describe Your feelings 'bout it.
Thanks in advanse,
Pablo
|
| 9 responses total. |
arthurp
|
|
response 1 of 9:
|
Nov 16 02:07 UTC 1997 |
I run the K5 in Linux. It is a great chip. I expect the same of the
K6, but I don't have any first hand experience.
Floating point is not as good as Intel, but integer is better.
|
wolfg676
|
|
response 2 of 9:
|
Apr 11 10:25 UTC 1998 |
I think I'm going to have to "borrow" an idea from Scott's setname and start
calling myself the "glassy-eyed AMD evangelist. :)
I've been running a K6 since December, and I have no complaints. I recommend
K6 CPUs to anyone who asks. (no I don't sell them, so I have no monetary
intrests in AMD. but it wouldn't hurt if they offered...)
I run a K6-233MHz with a FIC Apollo PA-2007 motherboard with 1MB of L2 cache,
96MB RAM, Win95 OSR2.1, and it performs beautifully. Quake, Quake II, GLHexen,
and pretty much anything else flies on it. I could email anyone Wintune97
benchmark info if they want it. I could go on, but I'll direct you to
http://www.amd.com for more info. They'll tell you much more about their
chips.
|
arthurp
|
|
response 3 of 9:
|
Apr 16 01:59 UTC 1998 |
I now have the K6 233 as well. Very nice. I had to go this way because
I can't stand Intel's scheme involving slot1/slot2. They suck.
|
dang
|
|
response 4 of 9:
|
Apr 17 17:19 UTC 1998 |
(I have a dual processer PII 300 and it's faster than anything I've ever seen
outside of an alpha. It *really* screams.)
(So don't tell me that intel can't make fast hardware. This computer has the
ultraSparcs I've used beat.)
|
arthurp
|
|
response 5 of 9:
|
Apr 18 05:37 UTC 1998 |
I didn't mean they suck technically, although...
|
dang
|
|
response 6 of 9:
|
Apr 19 01:39 UTC 1998 |
(Well, I don't know anything else about Intel than the hardware, which I
use extensively. :) Then too, I don't know anything else than Motorolla
than the hardware. )
|
ball
|
|
response 7 of 9:
|
Nov 12 16:18 UTC 2015 |
The other day I recycled a box of CPUs that I had been
hoarding for no readily-discernable reason. In amongst those
was my 450 MHz AMD K6-II+, which went into my primary
desktop machine during its "mid life refresh". It replaced a
225 MHz Cyrix MII. They both worked well with NetBSD.
|
kentn
|
|
response 8 of 9:
|
Nov 14 00:25 UTC 2015 |
Haven't heard of Cyrix processors in a long while. I used to have a
CPU like that in one of my computers (probably slower than yours, like
80 MHz). Between AMD and Intel, they largely chased the smaller CPU
companies out of business, I guess.
|
ball
|
|
response 9 of 9:
|
Nov 14 01:16 UTC 2015 |
VIA (who ate Cyrix and WinChip) have managed to cling on
by targetting embedded applications and adding things like
hardware random number generators and some cryptographic
functions. I was a bit surprised to learn that they were
still around.
|