🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <33775046.1C3C@prism.gatech.edu>,
Bart Youngblood  <gt5457c@prism.gatech.edu> wrote:
>Heck, if I were to buy a new processor, I'djust get a Pentium II. You
>get more L1 and L2 cache, higher clock speed, and MMX.

You've been listening to Intel. :) What they're not telling you is that 
that L2 cache is now severely crippled-- it runs at 1/2 the clock speed of
the processor, where the Pentium Pro's cache runs at the full clock speed.

The good news is that not putting the L2 cache on the processor lets Intel 
produce the chip _much_ cheaper. The bad news is that we're not going to 
see that for a _long time_. Prices? Well, for just a motherboard and a 
processor: 

P5/200 MMX: $520 for the processor, $150 for a good board.
P-II/200:   $770 for the processor, $350 for a good board.

(figures are ballpark from the same distributor. I'm sure you can find both 
cheaper, but the ratio'll be about the same)

As if this wasn't enough, it turns out that Intel botched the math functions
in the P-II and Pentium Pro processors, as well. It looks like this problem
isn't as 'big' as the FDIV bug in the original Pentia, but you should read
up on it before you make the decision. 

EE Times put the story on the web: 
http://techweb.cmp.com/eet/news/97/952news/extra.html
Their follow-up:
http://techweb.cmp.com/eet/news/97/953news/hotintel.html

Of course, the new K6 might be a good idea-- does some screaming MMXish 
stuff, keeps up with a PPro of a similar speed for normal Win95 applications,
but it's a pig in DOS-- definitely _not_ the processor for Quake fiends.

The "what processor now?" question just does _not_ have an easy answer on 
the high end at the moment...

-F
-- 
 ,-.  J.D. Forinash:        geek, speed demon, sysadmin, Vogon poet, smeghead
( <   Waka waka.                              <IMG SRC = "stardestroyer.asc">
 `-'  http://www.cc.gatech.edu/people/home/foxtrot      foxtrot@cc.gatech.edu
The more you learn, the better your luck gets.  Phoenix:GFW        O-     <*>