🚀 go-pugleaf

RetroBBS NetNews Server

Inspired by RockSolid Light RIP Retro Guy

Article View: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware
Article #20811

Which sucks less, intel 166 MMX or AMD 200 k6 MMX??

#20811
From: wahlm01
Date: Fri, 27 Feb 1998 00:00
60 lines
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-mail

Show 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