AMD K62-500 why so slow?
Sycho_Graphics
Crucial 133mhz RAM a voodoo 3 2000 OC'ed to 175 MHz, 13GB Matrox, CD, and
CD-RW. My question is that I can not OC the CPU past 500Mhz without
problems, also Norton benchmark shows the system as slower than a Pentium
233??? and only 1/4 as fast as a Pentium 450 what gives? I have a Pentium
Pro 200 and this system is definitely faster than that.
Plato
>
> I have a K62-500 running on a BCM IN530 (NEC980) motherboard with 128megs of
> Crucial 133mhz RAM a voodoo 3 2000 OC'ed to 175 MHz, 13GB Matrox, CD, and
Does anybody else recognize the mobo or brand of ram???
Marc@Home
http://bcmgvc.com/Reviews/The%20Upgrade%20Center%20-%20BCM%20IN530%20Motherb
oard%20Review.htm
and here's the page on the manufacturer's website:
http://www.legend.com.au/in530.html (hit the More Information button to get
manual/drivers etc).
The ram is top stuff, Crucial are cool (am running 256mb PC133 Crucial ram
myself).
I don't think the K6-2 500's are any good for overclocking (I'm sure
someone's going to post that they've gotten theirs to 2.7ghz!) as they're
almost at their 'threshold' already.
I'd say dump the crappy V3 card ;) Get a GeForce2, but only if you're
planning on running 1280 and above...
Regards,
Marc
"Plato" <25@62.4> wrote in message news:3910858F.472B@62.4...
Evans
VP1543 is a much better board for this processor. Neither of these boards
however are 133mhz. I have built 5 systems using the BCM/K6-2 500 and they
have been very good units.
--
Jim Evans
The only easy day......was yesterday...HooYah!
Plato <25@62.4> wrote in message news:3910858F.472B@62.4...
> Sycho_Graphics wrote:
> >
> > I have a K62-500 running on a BCM IN530 (NEC980) motherboard with
128megs of
> > Crucial 133mhz RAM a voodoo 3 2000 OC'ed to 175 MHz, 13GB Matrox, CD,
and
>
Matt
RAM will be his bottleneck? He'd need to get at least an Athlon 500 (which
will probably have issues with the GF2
"Marc@Home" <marcmca...@freeuk.com> wrote in message
news:FG%P4.7301$OO6.7...@nnrp4.clara.net...
> There's a review of the mobo here:
>
http://bcmgvc.com/Reviews/The%20Upgrade%20Center%20-%20BCM%20IN530%20Motherb
> oard%20Review.htm
>
> and here's the page on the manufacturer's website:
> http://www.legend.com.au/in530.html (hit the More Information button to
get
> manual/drivers etc).
>
> The ram is top stuff, Crucial are cool (am running 256mb PC133 Crucial ram
> myself).
>
> I don't think the K6-2 500's are any good for overclocking (I'm sure
> someone's going to post that they've gotten theirs to 2.7ghz!) as they're
> almost at their 'threshold' already.
>
> I'd say dump the crappy V3 card ;) Get a GeForce2, but only if you're
> planning on running 1280 and above...
>
> Regards,
> Marc
>
>
> >
dave
no, AMD just sucks. Especially the athlon 1ghz, 1/3 multiplier on the cache,
what a joke. I doubt AMD will even be around in 2 years.
Crinkly wrote in message ...
>why? is there something wrong with crucial mem?? i was gonna get some
>myself....
>
>"Plato" <25@62.4> wrote in message news:3910858F.472B@62.4...
>> Sycho_Graphics wrote:
>> >
>> > I have a K62-500 running on a BCM IN530 (NEC980) motherboard with
>128megs of
>> > Crucial 133mhz RAM a voodoo 3 2000 OC'ed to 175 MHz, 13GB Matrox, CD,
>and
>>
Thor
don't particularly care for 'em though.
..
"Plato" <25@62.4> wrote in message news:3910858F.472B@62.4...
> Sycho_Graphics wrote:
> >
> > I have a K62-500 running on a BCM IN530 (NEC980) motherboard with
128megs of
> > Crucial 133mhz RAM a voodoo 3 2000 OC'ed to 175 MHz, 13GB Matrox, CD,
and
>
> Does anybody else recognize the mobo or brand of ram???
______________________________________________________________________
Posted Via Uncensored-News.Com - Still Only $9.95 - http://www.uncensored-news.com
With Servers In California, Texas And Virginia - The Worlds Uncensored News Source
Webmasters New RevShare Program http://www.uncensored-news.com/revshare.html
Thor
Thor
dod a much better job of offloading CPU tasks, making it much more effective
on slower processors compared to chips like the TNT/TNT2, or Voodoo
chipsets.
..
"Matt" <h34d...@cableinet.co.uk> wrote in message
news:b_2Q4.835$tQ3.1...@news3.cableinet.net...
> What's the point in getting a GF2 when the CPU and probably the amount of
> RAM will be his bottleneck? He'd need to get at least an Athlon 500 (which
> will probably have issues with the GF2
> "Marc@Home" <marcmca...@freeuk.com> wrote in message
> news:FG%P4.7301$OO6.7...@nnrp4.clara.net...
> > There's a review of the mobo here:
> >
>
http://bcmgvc.com/Reviews/The%20Upgrade%20Center%20-%20BCM%20IN530%20Motherb
> > oard%20Review.htm
> >
> > and here's the page on the manufacturer's website:
> > http://www.legend.com.au/in530.html (hit the More Information button to
> get
> > manual/drivers etc).
> >
> > The ram is top stuff, Crucial are cool (am running 256mb PC133 Crucial
ram
> > myself).
> >
> > I don't think the K6-2 500's are any good for overclocking (I'm sure
> > someone's going to post that they've gotten theirs to 2.7ghz!) as
they're
> > almost at their 'threshold' already.
> >
> > I'd say dump the crappy V3 card ;) Get a GeForce2, but only if you're
> > planning on running 1280 and above...
> >
> > Regards,
> > Marc
> >
> >
> > "Plato" <25@62.4> wrote in message news:3910858F.472B@62.4...
> > >
Plato
>
> why? is there something wrong with crucial mem?? i was gonna get some
> myself....
Its just not a brand I see for sale in my area so I have no idea about
it
>
> "Plato" <25@62.4> wrote in message news:3910858F.472B@62.4...
> > Sycho_Graphics wrote:
> > >
> > > I have a K62-500 running on a BCM IN530 (NEC980) motherboard with
> 128megs of
> > > Crucial 133mhz RAM a voodoo 3 2000 OC'ed to 175 MHz, 13GB Matrox, CD,
> and
> >
Crinkly
myself....
"Plato" <25@62.4> wrote in message news:3910858F.472B@62.4...
Patrick.guarnaccia
processor but AMD is nice processor.
Im running two k6 500 using asus p5a 1 Intel P II 450 asus p3bf and one
Athlon 650 asus k7v
all of them are great
the 450 @ 504 MHZ is a bit faster than the Amd k6 500 but if you compare
price you have more for your money with the AMD cpu
My 2 cents
"dave" <nos...@spamsucks.com> wrote in message
news:8eqip6$4b96$1...@newssvr03-int.news.prodigy.com...
>
> no, AMD just sucks. Especially the athlon 1ghz, 1/3 multiplier on the
cache,
> what a joke. I doubt AMD will even be around in 2 years.
>
> Crinkly wrote in message ...
Scott Gardner
wrote:
>
>no, AMD just sucks. Especially the athlon 1ghz, 1/3 multiplier on the cache,
>what a joke. I doubt AMD will even be around in 2 years.
>
I'm kind of naive about these things, since I try to use USENET for
intelligent, non-confrontational discussions, but is this what people
mean when they talk about a "troll"?? (grin)
Scott Gardner
P.S. While it's true that the major publications have found that the
PIII holds a slight advantage over the Athlon at identical clock
speeds, the fact remains that AMD beat Intel to the 1 GHz market, and
you ALWAYS deserve bonus points for that. One of AMD's finest
moments, and the one that set them upon the road towards being a major
force in the market was when they came out with the 386-40MHZ CPU when
the best Intel had was the 386-33. Prior to that, AMD had been
strictly playing a game of catch-up. Once again, they've actually
released a significantly higher-speed processor in large volumes
before Intel did. I think AMD will be around for longer than two
years. If nothing else, this is a good thing because it will keep
Intel from resting on their laurels.
Never underestimate the value of being first to market with
new technology. After all, that's the whole reason why IBM and IBM
clones use the x86 technology from Intel. When IBM was putting
together the first PC, they considered four different processors, the
Intel 8088, the Intel 8086, the Motorola 6800, and some chip from
either NEC or National Semiconductor that I can't remember the name of
off the top of my head--it starts with a 16, that's all I can
remember. The i8088 was by far the least desirable of the four from
an engineering standpoint, but guess what--it was the only processor
that a complete set of support chips for the motherboard was already
available. Since IBM's first priority was getting the PC to market
within a year, they went with the i8088, and we've been living with
the consequences of that decision ever since, for good and ill.
VGTech
That was a much too lucid explanation for this group, but very well spoken
nonetheless. I concur, though I cannot express myself as eloquently and
thoroughly as you did.
<Salute>
Tim Dineen
VGraphix Helpdesk
www.vgraphix.com
PS Did anyone resolve this guy's original problem?
Just checking....
Rich Lockyer
They don't respond to emails to tech support (you'll get a nasty
response if you send a tech question to human resources).
I have their 1543, which is the full ATX, the IN530 is a micro-ATX
IN530 SIS 530 AMI
VP1543 ALI M1541/1543 Award
Both are 100mhz max FSB
I don't know anything about the SIS chipset, but AMD does list the
IN530 as approved for the K6-2/500.
Personally, I'm using my last BCM board, and am seriously considering
replacing it with a P5A very soon. The P5A is approved for all of the
K6-2 series, and seems to be very popular.
The BCM boards are basic cheap boards that computer shops love to
package systems with.
One of the main reasons that I am planning to dump my BCM is the lack
of support. They won't respond to my email, they don't respond to
their own message board, and their distributors can't tell me if my MB
will support my new 40g hard drive.
They have BIOS updates available, but according to Sandra, I have a 1m
BIOS, and the upgrades are for the 2m chips. They refer you to Award,
and Award in turn refers you to Unicore.
*UNICORE* can't tell me if my BIOS will support the large drive, but
they will be happy to SELL me either a new chip or a flash kit for
$60!
SIXTY FRIGGING DOLLARS FOR A $12 CHIP WITH AWARD'S CODE BURNED ON IT?
I DON'T FRIGGING THINK SO!!! For $86 I can get a new P5A and not
have to worry about BCM's terrible customer support.
Rich Lockyer
<marcmca...@freeuk.com> wrote:
>I'd say dump the crappy V3 card ;) Get a GeForce2, but only if you're
>planning on running 1280 and above...
It isn't the V3. I'm running a K6-2/450 with a V3-2k and my Sandra
benchmarks are right up there with the K6-3/450, slightly above the
Celeron 366 on CPU ops, and kick the hell out of the 366 on FPU ops.
Quake3 at 1024x768 runs about 30fps, 17fps running the Barry'sworld
10-minute 32-player "crusher" demo... My V3-2k is overclocked to 153
(on it's way up)... the 143 to 153 got me ONE fps.
Naphman OZ
but what is the clock setting? Is it one that uses the x2 setting but is
really x5 or x6?
While the CPU is thinking that its running at 500.
the board (possible BIOS Flash fix) may not, and somewhere something is
messing up?
--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Leo Wyszynski
MCP (Workstation, Server, Enterprise, IIS v4, Network Essentials)
One more to go till MCSE!!!!!
nap...@mpx.com(NOSPAM).au
ICQ # 29508690
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
"I saw a woman wearing a sweatshirt with 'Guess' on it.
I said,'Thyroid problem?'"
CARD YOU WILL NEVER SEE IN HALLMARK:
"Looking back over the years that we've been together,
I can't help but wonder: What the f--- was I thinking?"
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sycho_Graphics <Sycho_G...@email.msn.com> wrote in message
news:e$6SIgTt$GA.271@cpmsnbbsa04...
> I have a K62-500 running on a BCM IN530 (NEC980) motherboard with 128megs
of
> Crucial 133mhz RAM a voodoo 3 2000 OC'ed to 175 MHz, 13GB Matrox, CD, and
Beannie
processing unit) and DOES take off HUGE amounts of CPU "thinking" as such. A
geforce (for games) would definalty be a wise choice. However if you only
want standard, better than average graphics, then keep the V3 and upgrade
board and chip, probably to a PIII 600 at least. Then you would have a
half-decent computer to do stuff on.
Beannie
www.mpx.com.au/~beannie
Thor <m...@arms.com> wrote in message
news:3910dacd$1...@news2.uncensored-news.com...
> > > I'd say dump the crappy V3 card ;) Get a GeForce2, but only if you're
> > > planning on running 1280 and above...
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > > Marc
> > >
> > >
> > > "Plato" <25@62.4> wrote in message news:3910858F.472B@62.4...
> > > >
> > > > Does anybody else recognize the mobo or brand of ram???
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>
Sycho_Graphics
that the motherboard is a bit lacking and I will probably replace that item
any suggestions (has to be mini-ATX). The thing is that the computer is
fairly quick but does poorly on bench marks. I run Half-Life, Quake at
800x600 etc.. and get good frame rates while I play. This will actually be
a second Computer as I am already working on it's replacement. I think the
Voodoo3 is OK for my needs and you can't beat the price a GeForce would be
overkill and overpriced.
For new computer I am waiting like many others for the DDR ram and
motherboards issue to get sorted out. Oh yea and a CPU that can actually
benefit from it, I want an AMD 1Gz but not at 1/3 cache speed I don't.
Finally, for the guy who commented about Intel being so great if it wasn't
for AMD we would be paying $1000.00 for a PIII 500 now and 1Gz would be a
dream, oh wait for Intel it is a dream!! Screw Intel.
"Naphman OZ" <nap...@mpx.com.au> wrote in message
news:39113bf3$0$31...@news01.syd.optusnet.com.au...
Hyper
>
> The clock setting is correct for a K62-500 5.0 x 100mhz @ 2.2v. I too feel
> that the motherboard is a bit lacking and I will probably replace that item
> any suggestions (has to be mini-ATX). The thing is that the computer is
> fairly quick but does poorly on bench marks. I run Half-Life, Quake at
> 800x600 etc.. and get good frame rates while I play. This will actually be
> a second Computer as I am already working on it's replacement. I think the
> Voodoo3 is OK for my needs and you can't beat the price a GeForce would be
> overkill and overpriced.
>
> For new computer I am waiting like many others for the DDR ram and
> motherboards issue to get sorted out. Oh yea and a CPU that can actually
> benefit from it, I want an AMD 1Gz but not at 1/3 cache speed I don't.
>
> Finally, for the guy who commented about Intel being so great if it wasn't
> for AMD we would be paying $1000.00 for a PIII 500 now and 1Gz would be a
> dream, oh wait for Intel it is a dream!! Screw Intel.
>
and K7 are equal in speed. The P3's, in order to benefit from that great RDRAM
that is around have to spend $800 for 128 megs of it. If you instead get a K7,
save $150 - $200 on the chip itself and then another $400 on the ram you pump
all that extra savings in to like 512 megs of SDRAM and you blow away the P3
--
Computer help available at http://members.xoom.com/Hyper_Hands/
"So I said, 'Red MM, Blue MM, they all end up the same color'"
Yodel
done my the CPU but with the GF it's taken onto the vid card.
--
Ą
Beannie said...
Yodel
me crappy Cerely it hardly makes any difference except at high
resolutions, and then it doesn't make enough difference to be payable.
--
Rich Lockyer said...
>On Wed, 3 May 2000 21:11:37 +0100, "Marc@Home"
><marcmca...@freeuk.com> wrote:
>
>>I'd say dump the crappy V3 card ;) Get a GeForce2, but only if you're
>>planning on running 1280 and above...
>
Matt
AMD chips, and they're only just getting resolved. However, the GF2 will be
far more powerful then the rest of his system, and thus there is no point in
getting one, just like I need a new processor, 'cos the GeForce is just too
fast for my 400 PII
"Matt" <h34d...@cableinet.co.uk> wrote in message
news:b_2Q4.835$tQ3.1...@news3.cableinet.net...
> What's the point in getting a GF2 when the CPU and probably the amount of
> RAM will be his bottleneck? He'd need to get at least an Athlon 500 (which
> will probably have issues with the GF2
> "Marc@Home" <marcmca...@freeuk.com> wrote in message
> news:FG%P4.7301$OO6.7...@nnrp4.clara.net...
> > There's a review of the mobo here:
> >
>
http://bcmgvc.com/Reviews/The%20Upgrade%20Center%20-%20BCM%20IN530%20Motherb
> > oard%20Review.htm
> >
> > and here's the page on the manufacturer's website:
> > http://www.legend.com.au/in530.html (hit the More Information button to
> get
> > manual/drivers etc).
> >
> > The ram is top stuff, Crucial are cool (am running 256mb PC133 Crucial
ram
> > myself).
> >
> > I don't think the K6-2 500's are any good for overclocking (I'm sure
> > someone's going to post that they've gotten theirs to 2.7ghz!) as
they're
> > almost at their 'threshold' already.
> >
> > planning on running 1280 and above...
> >
Lamb
I found that my creative soundblaster PCI128 OEM knocked my
benchmarks down to about a third of what they should be with my
K6-2 450: ie 1027 mips without sound card, 443 mips with sound
card plugged in. I have now changed it to a Diamond card and my
benchmarks are back up where they should be......Bizzare I know,
but thought I would mention it just in case you are using a
PCI128.
* Sent from RemarQ http://www.remarq.com The Internet's Discussion Network *
The fastest and easiest way to search and participate in Usenet - Free!
Plato
>
> I found that my creative soundblaster PCI128 OEM knocked my
> benchmarks down to about a third of what they should be with my
A question. You know that a pci winmodem uses the cpu for stuff that an
isa modem does onboard the modem card. Is it the same thing [principle]
with PCI sound cards?
One reason Im asking is that I see so many national brand new systems
that seem to run very slow for the cpu and ram in them and I dont know
why exactly.
Thor
performance. Problems can arise out of many devices sharing a few
interrupts, though. I think the slowness you speak of generally lies in the
amount of trash that most national brands like to load up when windows
starts. Purge them of this fluff, and they tend to perform much better.
However, proprietray brands in general, I have always found perform slower
than non-proprietary models.
..
"Plato" <25@62.4> wrote in message news:391241EB.70E5@62.4...
______________________________________________________________________
Crinkly
running with a K62-xxx cpu.... (Halflife is a good example - more than 10
frames per second slower on a k62-500 than a plain little voodoo3 2000
@143mhz) Despite the Geforce having a dedicated 'GPU' it is still fairly CPU
dependant - especially for the majority of games that do not take advantage
of the GPU - under normal direct 3D gaming it performs very similarly to a
TNT2 when coupled with a K62 CPU....
Take a look at the old super7 video card round up on www.aceshardware - or
better still - try it yourself... The voodoo range are the least CPU
dependant and provide the best overall performance for K62-xxx systems.
"Matt" <h34d...@cableinet.co.uk> wrote in message
news:ralQ4.1939$tQ3.2...@news3.cableinet.net...
Yodel
The K62 isn't a better graphics card than the V3 and vice-versa.
--
Crinkly said...
Al West
in?
PIII600E@870 on BE6v2
--
==============================
So what should I do with PRBOX.com ?
email: bigbadpinke...@prbox.com
Are you getting paid to be online? Try these two...
https://secure.clickdough.com/servlets/cr/CRSignup.po?referral_id=westar
http://www.alladvantage.com/go.asp?refid=FPM-496
Free 300MB Shell Account. Check it out:
http://www.ebsd.com/cgi-bin/e/e?acct=prbox
"Lamb" <da...@dlcs.freeserve.co.uk> wrote in message
news:1c5e992e...@usw-ex0102-084.remarq.com...
> I know this sounds crazy - what sound card are you using?
>
> I found that my creative soundblaster PCI128 OEM knocked my
> benchmarks down to about a third of what they should be with my
Sycho_Graphics
thing I did was DELETE all the junk and re install Win 98SE.
Here are latest Sandra scores (PATHETIC)
CPU Dhrystone 748 MIPS
FPU Whestone 576 MFLOPS
Integer-MMX 1172 it/s
Floating-Point 3Dnow! 1765 it/s
"Thor" <m...@arms.com> wrote in message
news:39124...@news2.uncensored-news.com...
> Not in my experience. PCI sound cards, for the most part improve
> performance. Problems can arise out of many devices sharing a few
> interrupts, though. I think the slowness you speak of generally lies in
the
> amount of trash that most national brands like to load up when windows
> starts. Purge them of this fluff, and they tend to perform much better.
> However, proprietray brands in general, I have always found perform slower
> than non-proprietary models.
>
>
>
> ..
> "Plato" <25@62.4> wrote in message news:391241EB.70E5@62.4...
> > Lamb wrote:
> > >
> > > I found that my creative soundblaster PCI128 OEM knocked my
> > > benchmarks down to about a third of what they should be with my
> >
Rich Lockyer
FPS between resolutions. I decided to start tweaking to reduce lag in
Counterstrike and Q3 games with a million players, so I figured I'd
back down to as low as 640x480 to see if it helped. Nope... haven't
checked CS, but the Q3 included demos and the crusher demo don't
change at all... there's MAYBE a .5 fps difference between 1024x768
and 640x480.
Guess I know what res I'll be running.
On Thu, 04 May 2000 19:33:47 GMT, he.who...@spammer.bastards
(Yodel) wrote:
>I've got my V3 2000 all the way up to 175. The trouble is that with
>me crappy Cerely it hardly makes any difference except at high
>resolutions, and then it doesn't make enough difference to be payable.
>
>Rich Lockyer said...
>>On Wed, 3 May 2000 21:11:37 +0100, "Marc@Home"
>><marcmca...@freeuk.com> wrote:
>>
>>>I'd say dump the crappy V3 card ;) Get a GeForce2, but only if you're
>>>planning on running 1280 and above...
>>
Rich Lockyer
Aopen MX59 Pro VIA MVP4
Aopen MX59 Pro II VIA MVP4
Asus P5S-VM SIS530
GVC IN530 (We already know about THAT one)
Gigabyte GA-5SMM SIS530
Soyo SY-5SSM SIS530
This isn't ALL of them... just the brands that I've seen a lot of
OC'ers talking about. A lot of the brands have numbers so similar
that I wonder if they aren't repackaged from another vendor.
On Thu, 4 May 2000 10:49:41 -0400, "Sycho_Graphics"
<Sycho_G...@email.msn.com> wrote:
>The clock setting is correct for a K62-500 5.0 x 100mhz @ 2.2v. I too feel
>that the motherboard is a bit lacking and I will probably replace that item
>any suggestions (has to be mini-ATX). The thing is that the computer is
>fairly quick but does poorly on bench marks. I run Half-Life, Quake at
>800x600 etc.. and get good frame rates while I play. This will actually be
>a second Computer as I am already working on it's replacement. I think the
>Voodoo3 is OK for my needs and you can't beat the price a GeForce would be
>overkill and overpriced.
>
>For new computer I am waiting like many others for the DDR ram and
>motherboards issue to get sorted out. Oh yea and a CPU that can actually
>benefit from it, I want an AMD 1Gz but not at 1/3 cache speed I don't.
>
>Finally, for the guy who commented about Intel being so great if it wasn't
>for AMD we would be paying $1000.00 for a PIII 500 now and 1Gz would be a
>dream, oh wait for Intel it is a dream!! Screw Intel.
>
>
Plato
>
> However, proprietray brands in general, I have always found perform slower
> than non-proprietary models.
Do you think it might have to do with the motherboard design? What I
mean is, I read that folks upgrade their motherboard just to increase
speed. I recall when folks said Tyan was a super fast motherboard. Do
you think the national brands sacrifice speed on the motherboard in
exchange for reliability?
Frodo
cache,
> what a joke. I doubt AMD will even be around in 2 years.
if joke then
lol
else
feel sorry
end if
Crinkly
when coupled with a K62 cpu than the Voodoo 3 - the voodoo 3 is less CPU
dependant for the majority of games.
This is a fact.
"Yodel" <he.who...@spammer.bastards> wrote in message
news:39121891...@news.clara.net...
> >> > > I'd say dump the crappy V3 card ;) Get a GeForce2, but only if
you're
> >> > > planning on running 1280 and above...
> >> > >
Thor
to use. Traditionally in the past, off brand machines commonly used
off-brand controllers, and chipsets, and/or cheap integrated video and
sound. This always put them behind the major non-proprietary machines that
typically used the most popular, and highest performing chipsets available.
Today it's not as bad, considering that some chipset makers who, in the past
were these "off-brand" makes (such as VIA, ALI, etc.) have gotten
considerably better. A couple years ago, when the majority of the
non-proprietary makes were using Intel chipsets which set the standard for
compatibility, and the highest performance, brands like Compaq, IBM, Packard
Bell, etc. were commonly using the cheap SIS, Chips & tech, VIA, chipsets
etc. which were rife with problems, incompatibilities, and were slow
performers. I think the bottom line was $$$.
..
"Plato" <25@62.4> wrote in message news:391260BC.558E@62.4...
Adam Zilinskas
floating point math of the system CPU to help
the graphics board. The K6-2 is weaker on
floating point math so it probably has a bigger
impact on GeForce cards. (implied, when
comparing to a Celeron or P-ii or P-iii
of the same clock speed as the K6-2)
--
Adam Zilinskas
SolutionsIQ
aez at msn.com
"Crinkly" <Ye...@Right.com> wrote in message
news:q9yQ4.3564$tQ3.3...@news3.cableinet.net...
Yodel
--
Crinkly said...
Yodel
the graphics card can eat, so to speak. It isn't any harder on the
CPU to calculate high res, so lowering it doesn't make the CPU send
data to the graphics card any faster.
--
Ą
Rich Lockyer said...
>What surprised the hell out of me is that there was ZERO difference in
>FPS between resolutions. I decided to start tweaking to reduce lag in
>Counterstrike and Q3 games with a million players, so I figured I'd
>back down to as low as 640x480 to see if it helped. Nope... haven't
>checked CS, but the Q3 included demos and the crusher demo don't
>change at all... there's MAYBE a .5 fps difference between 1024x768
>and 640x480.
>Guess I know what res I'll be running.
>
>
>On Thu, 04 May 2000 19:33:47 GMT, he.who...@spammer.bastards
>(Yodel) wrote:
>
>>I've got my V3 2000 all the way up to 175. The trouble is that with
>>me crappy Cerely it hardly makes any difference except at high
>>resolutions, and then it doesn't make enough difference to be payable.
>
>>
>>Rich Lockyer said...
>>>On Wed, 3 May 2000 21:11:37 +0100, "Marc@Home"
>>><marcmca...@freeuk.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>I'd say dump the crappy V3 card ;) Get a GeForce2, but only if you're
>>>>planning on running 1280 and above...
>>>
Jimmi Gruen
Spitfire) and the yet to be announced P3 killer with the codename
Thunderbird. The Duron will be the Celeron killer and have 128 KB full speed
L2 cache and most likely run on the 200 MHz bus...eat that...66 MHz bus vs
double pumped bus=200 MHz, and the Thunderbird will have 256-512 Kb full
speed L2 cache.
If the Athlon nearly outperforms a pentium 3 with full speed L2 cache, then
guess what the Thunderbird will do with full speed L2 cache...
I'm not saying that Intel sucks, i'm just saying that AMD is a good company
too.
dave <nos...@spamsucks.com> skrev i
diskussionsgruppsmeddelandet:8eqip6$4b96$1...@newssvr03-int.news.prodigy.com...
>
> no, AMD just sucks. Especially the athlon 1ghz, 1/3 multiplier on the
cache,
> what a joke. I doubt AMD will even be around in 2 years.
>
> Crinkly wrote in message ...
> >why? is there something wrong with crucial mem?? i was gonna get some
> >myself....
> >
> >"Plato" <25@62.4> wrote in message news:3910858F.472B@62.4...
> >> Sycho_Graphics wrote:
> >> >
> >> > I have a K62-500 running on a BCM IN530 (NEC980) motherboard with
> >128megs of
> >> > Crucial 133mhz RAM a voodoo 3 2000 OC'ed to 175 MHz, 13GB Matrox, CD,
> >and
> >>
Crinkly
"Yodel" <he.who...@spammer.bastards> wrote in message
news:39131b72...@news.clara.net...
> >> >> > > I'd say dump the crappy V3 card ;) Get a GeForce2, but only if
> >you're
> >> >> > > planning on running 1280 and above...
> >> >> > >
> >> >> > > Regards,
> >> >> > > Marc
> >> >> > >
> >> >> > >
> >> >> > > "Plato" <25@62.4> wrote in message news:3910858F.472B@62.4...
> >> >> > > >
Robert
don't have Sandra scores, but my Winbench CPUmark 99 score is 10 compared to
11 I get for my old pentium 200mmx chip. Over on the http://www.amdzone.com
message board there are a couple of other people who have had similar
performance problems which they fixed with a replacement CPU. I am not quite
convinced it's not the motherboard, since everyone with a problem seems to
be using a P5A. I will probably send my CPU to AMD for testing next week.
Their tech support claims that noone else has had a problem similar to mine.
AMD K6-2 500
64mb of Mushkin budget pc130
ASUS P5A mb with built in Audio
"Thor" <m...@arms.com> wrote in message
news:3912d87c$1...@news2.uncensored-news.com...
Alan
Athlon CACHE's now? And the K6-2 and K6-3's? or the Celerons and P2's?
Jimmi Gruen wrote:
> > >> Does anybody else recognize the mobo or brand of ram???
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
--
-Alan
Custom Computer Builder
Upgrader
Seller
http://www.nvo.com/alanshop/
David Cooley
Alan wrote:
>
> You referred to FULL SPEED LEVEL 2 Cache a few times. What is the speed of the
> Athlon CACHE's now? And the K6-2 and K6-3's? or the Celerons and P2's?
The Athlon's cache speed depends on the speed of the CPU. It is divided
down from the CPU clock... I think 350 MHz is the fastest cache on
Athlons (though I could be wrong...)
The K6-2 has NO on-die cache. The K6-3 has on-die cache, and it runs at
the CPU clock speed (full speed L2 cache)
so a 450 MHz K6-3 has 450MHz cache
Jimmi Gruen
The sisoft scores are a little low. Do you have write allocation and write
combining on? Is L2 cache switched on? If you don't now about these things,
I can tell you how to check if these things are enabled.
As a reference, one of my computers, a K6-2 400, 128 Mb with a Voodoo 3 3000
AGP get's 916 MIPS and 498 MFLOOPS in Sandra 2000.
In the CPU multimedia test, it scores 975 it/sec in the MMX test and 1403
it/sec in the 3dnow FPU test.
Visit www.tweakfiles.com and click benchmarks. On that site, there's a
message board to, where you can get more help. I can especially recommend 3D
Mark 2000. It allows you to compare your results to computers with the same
processor and graphics card.My K6-2 400 mentioned above gets 1316 3dmarks
and thereby beat the average result of Celeron 433's with Voodoo 3's (just
bragging a little about my tweaking skills, never mind). Also try Tirtanium,
it has a fairly accurate and large database of different computers. Some of
the results in that database are from an older version though, so look at
the version number before you blame the K6-2 processor. I am sorry, but I
can't remember what my K6-2 got in that test, and I haven't got it installed
right now. Wintune is a great program too. My system is in Wintune's online
database, among with a lot of other K6-2 systems.
If you wan't to find out what results you should get, just take my K6-2 400
results, divide them by 400 and the multiply them by 500.
Sycho_Graphics <Sycho_G...@email.msn.com> skrev i
diskussionsgruppsmeddelandet:O3vJjukt$GA.321@cpmsnbbsa04...
> I am using a SB LIVE and my modem is a US robotics 56K sportster. The
first
> thing I did was DELETE all the junk and re install Win 98SE.
>
> Here are latest Sandra scores (PATHETIC)
>
> CPU Dhrystone 748 MIPS
> FPU Whestone 576 MFLOPS
>
> Integer-MMX 1172 it/s
> Floating-Point 3Dnow! 1765 it/s
>
>
>
> "Thor" <m...@arms.com> wrote in message
> news:39124...@news2.uncensored-news.com...
> > Not in my experience. PCI sound cards, for the most part improve
> > performance. Problems can arise out of many devices sharing a few
> > interrupts, though. I think the slowness you speak of generally lies in
> the
> > amount of trash that most national brands like to load up when windows
> > starts. Purge them of this fluff, and they tend to perform much better.
> > However, proprietray brands in general, I have always found perform
slower
> > than non-proprietary models.
> >
> >
> >
> > ..
> > "Plato" <25@62.4> wrote in message news:391241EB.70E5@62.4...
> > > Lamb wrote:
> > > >
> > > > I found that my creative soundblaster PCI128 OEM knocked my
> > > > benchmarks down to about a third of what they should be with my
> > >
> > > A question. You know that a pci winmodem uses the cpu for stuff that
an
> > > isa modem does onboard the modem card. Is it the same thing
[principle]
> > > with PCI sound cards?
> > >
> > > One reason Im asking is that I see so many national brand new systems
> > > that seem to run very slow for the cpu and ram in them and I dont know
> > > why exactly.
> >
> >
> >
> > ______________________________________________________________________
> > Posted Via Uncensored-News.Com - Still Only $9.95 -
> http://www.uncensored-news.com
> > With Servers In California, Texas And Virginia - The Worlds Uncensored
> News Source
Rich Lockyer
Same as an aircraft... it's made from 5 million parts, each produced
by the lowest bidder.
On Fri, 05 May 2000 01:48:44 -0400, Plato <25@62.4> wrote:
>Thor wrote:
>>
>> However, proprietray brands in general, I have always found perform slower
>> than non-proprietary models.
>
Crinkly
speed... and the Athlon severely trounces the Pentium II and non coppermine
Pentium IIIs
"David Cooley" <n5...@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:39135739...@bellsouth.net...
Yodel
--
Rich Lockyer said...
Jimmi Gruen
speed, usually 100 MHz. The K6-3 has three levels of cache. L1 (64kb), L2
(256 kb), both running at full speed, that is the speed of the processor, so
if it's a 450 MHz K6-3, then both L1 and L2 runs at 450 MHz too. It's L3
cache is the same as the K6-2's L2 cache, it sits on the mainboard and runs
at FSB speed.
Alan <al...@nospam.com> skrev i
diskussionsgruppsmeddelandet:39135678...@nospam.com...
> You referred to FULL SPEED LEVEL 2 Cache a few times. What is the speed
of the
> Athlon CACHE's now? And the K6-2 and K6-3's? or the Celerons and P2's?
>
David Maynard
That line is borrowed from the early days at NASA when an astronaut,
Glenn I think but don't really remember, commented something to the
effect that when getting in that little capsule ontop the Redstone he
tried to not think about how he was about to be blasted into space
aboard something all built by the lowest bidder. hehehe
Steve Carter
I have a Lucent modem (pci) with full on board capabilities. Some winmodems
are isa.
Steve
Nate
Robert wrote in message ...
>I'm having problems with an AMD K6-2 500 and an ASUS P5A combination. I
>don't have Sandra scores, but my Winbench CPUmark 99 score is 10 compared
to
>11 I get for my old pentium 200mmx chip. Over on the http://www.amdzone.com
>message board there are a couple of other people who have had similar
>performance problems which they fixed with a replacement CPU. I am not
quite
>convinced it's not the motherboard, since everyone with a problem seems to
>be using a P5A. I will probably send my CPU to AMD for testing next week.
>Their tech support claims that noone else has had a problem similar to
mine.
>
>AMD K6-2 500
>64mb of Mushkin budget pc130
>ASUS P5A mb with built in Audio
>
>"Thor" <m...@arms.com> wrote in message
>news:3912d87c$1...@news2.uncensored-news.com...
>> No I think they sacrifice speed for cheapness. It's the components they
>tend
>> to use. Traditionally in the past, off brand machines commonly used
>> off-brand controllers, and chipsets, and/or cheap integrated video and
>> sound. This always put them behind the major non-proprietary machines
that
>> typically used the most popular, and highest performing chipsets
>available.
>> Today it's not as bad, considering that some chipset makers who, in the
>past
>> were these "off-brand" makes (such as VIA, ALI, etc.) have gotten
>> considerably better. A couple years ago, when the majority of the
>> non-proprietary makes were using Intel chipsets which set the standard
for
>> compatibility, and the highest performance, brands like Compaq, IBM,
>Packard
>> Bell, etc. were commonly using the cheap SIS, Chips & tech, VIA, chipsets
>> etc. which were rife with problems, incompatibilities, and were slow
>> performers. I think the bottom line was $$$.
>>
>>
>> ..
>> "Plato" <25@62.4> wrote in message news:391260BC.558E@62.4...
>> > Thor wrote:
>> > >
>> > > However, proprietray brands in general, I have always found perform
>> slower
>> > > than non-proprietary models.
>> >
>> > Do you think it might have to do with the motherboard design? What I
>> > mean is, I read that folks upgrade their motherboard just to increase
>> > speed. I recall when folks said Tyan was a super fast motherboard. Do
>> > you think the national brands sacrifice speed on the motherboard in
>> > exchange for reliability?
>>
>>
Robert
revision 1.06. The bios is revision 1.007a. I have sent the cpu to AMD for
testing. I should have some feedback from them next week.
Robert
"Nate" <nob...@ix.netcom.com> wrote in message
Robert
processor and replaced it. I am now getting CPUmark99 scores of 24 and that
is with other processes running. They still won't admit to having a bad
batch of processors, but they do. Test your processor and if it isn't
running up to snuff send it to AMD for replacement. I'm pretty pissed off at
AMD right now. It took three weeks for them to replace my processor and when
I called they wouldn't admit to having any kind of a problem. Thanks to
their tech support my MB bios is screwed and it's going to cost me about $30
to fix it. Add that up with the cost of mailing my chip to AMD, the
tremendous amount of time I wasted trying to figure out what was wrong, and
the cost of all the long distance phone calls to AMD and I could have bought
a pentium on a slot 1 board with some upgrade potential. It will be a cold
day in hell when AMD gets my business again.
"Robert" <nos...@all.here> wrote in message
news:_hlT4.167$Ir2....@news.swbell.net...
Hiwayman
First off, whoever you bought it from, should have replaced it if there
were a problem. Baring that a rma to a manufacturer is going to take time.
None of us like to wait, but hey, thats a way of life.
It once took me 7 months of waiting and battling with Matrox, for them to
make good on a product.
How do you think all the people who bought the Int*l 820 chipsets with
sdram support felt? Or long ago when they sold processors with defective fpu
and initially flatly stated they would not replace them, because according
to them it didn't matter....
"Robert" <nos...@all.here> wrote in message
news:5dcZ4.39$fE6....@nnrp1.sbc.net...