Article View: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware
Article #20811Which sucks less, intel 166 MMX or AMD 200 k6 MMX??
From: wahlm01
Date: Fri, 27 Feb 1998 00:00
Date: Fri, 27 Feb 1998 00:00
60 lines
4959 bytes
4959 bytes
I have been using an intel p75 cpu overclocked to 90 MHz for almost 4 years now and it's starting show it's age. Almost two years ago I had to replace the motherboard (long story) but couldnt at that time afford to also replace the cpu. The motherboard I got was set up to take any proccessor then available including intel p200 so I expected to have a decent upgrade path available when cpu prices fell. Recently all cpu prices have taken a big dive or two and I ordered an intel p200 mmx. Later that night I went to the motherboard manufacturers webpage (biostar-usa.com) and discovered somthing awful. Apparently the motherbaord (MB-8500TVX ver 2.2) is emphatically *not* capable of running an intel 200 MMX processor even though it also said it can run an intel p200 or an intel p166 MMX or an AMD K6 PR2-200 or just about anything else out there that could run from 75-200 MHz. I checked their bios upgrade page and there was a little note to MB-8500TVX v 2.2 or earlier users that "upgrading the bios won't make the intel 200 MHz MMX hardware to work right. use running the intel MMX cpu at 166MHz instead" (sic). So I reluctantly cancelled my p200 mmx order. I cannot understand why a p200 or 166 mmx or k6 p200 mmx would work but not an intel p200 mmx but that is probably some very esoteric engineering blunder. What I need help with now is deciding what kind of cpu upgrade I should go with instead. I can't afford to spend more than about $150 on it and anyway I am saving money to get a pentium II AGP system in 1-2 years so motherboard replacement now is not a worthwhile option. First thing I'd like to mention is that my overclocked p75 (p90?) system is not as terrible slow as you might believe. It was simply *awful* at 3D games,until I got a Canopus Pure 3D, but it has never had any slowdown problems with any 2D game out there. at all. ever. Every office and internet application I have also does not seem to lack for cpu speed (although sometimes ISP speed could use improvement)I have seen my roomates p200 mmx performance enough to know that for everything but 3D games a p90 does not have any speed problems. The Canopus Pure 3D has improved my quake2 frame rate to about a minimum of 20 frames per second which is a *huge* improvement over playing quake2 on software. However I know from 3dfx quake2 framerates posted on the web that ungodly high frame rates are achievable. I also have used my pure 3d for a few hours in my roomates pc and there is no denying the improvement in smoothness that it gave to the game in addition to its very high framerate. So what all this means is I have to decide if I should upgrade to K6 P200 MMX, intel 166 MMX, or sit tight with my overclocked p75. I also need to know whether I should consider buying the mmx 200 and running it anyway (under the assumption that the 'won't work' thing is really just some BS like the 'flawed' pentium chips or 'overclocking your cpu will burn it out' crap)or getting an intel 166 MMX and clocking it to 200, or cranking my p75 to something evil like 150 and seeing what happens. I would spring for the K6 but there is one problem with it. Everybody says its in every way superior to the p200 MMX *except* that it runs 3d games like quake2 slower. I do not understand why its superior speed would be of any use at all if it doesnt count in 3d games. Has anybody ever had a game look better running on a K6 than say running on an intel MMX 166?? What game was it? it seems to me that given that everything but 3d games runs perfect on a p75 then all the extra speed in the K6 will not really be all that noticable. I also see that on Toms hardware web page the k6 233 had a slower quake2 framerate with a canopus pure 3d than the intel p200 MMX did with a pure 3d. Does this imply that the k6 p200 MMX might be slower at Quake2 on my system than the intel 166MMX? Well this posting is plenty long enough as it is. I hope some K6 users can convince me to buy a K6 I kinda had my heart set on at least a 200MHz cpu and whatever it is it's gotta be mmx. thanks to everyone for any insight or advice. -matt -----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==----- http://www.dejanews.com/ Now offering spam-free web-based newsreading
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<6d875p$joq$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!unknown!not-for-mailShow Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 10c1e0,7bc77938cdd2dd53,start X-Google-Attributes: gid10c1e0,public From: wahlm01@stcloudstate.edu Subject: Which sucks less, intel 166 MMX or AMD 200 k6 MMX?? Date: 1998/02/27 Message-ID: <6d875p$joq$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com> X-Deja-AN: 329237292 X-Http-User-Agent: Mozilla/4.01 [en] (Win95; I) X-Originating-IP-Addr: 199.17.55.109 Organization: Deja News - The Leader in Internet Discussion X-Article-Creation-Date: Sat Feb 28 05:26:30 1998 GMT Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware;,comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips;,alt.games.quake2;,intel.microprocessors.pentium