Date: Tue, 16 Mar 1999 07:48:18 -0700 From: Brandon Gillespie <brandon@roguetrader.com> To: freebsd-hardware@FreeBSD.ORG, peter.jeremy@auss2.alcatel.com.au Subject: Re: P-II vs K6-2 Message-ID: <19990316074818.A23561@ice.cold.org> In-Reply-To: <26656.921575352@critter.freebsd.dk>; from Poul-Henning Kamp on Tue, Mar 16, 1999 at 10:09:12AM %2B0100 References: <199903160902.KAA23875@cicero1.cybercity.dk> <26656.921575352@critter.freebsd.dk>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--IJpNTDwzlM2Ie8A6 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Tue, Mar 16, 1999 at 10:09:12AM +0100, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote: > In message <199903160902.KAA23875@cicero1.cybercity.dk>, "Rudy Gireyev" w= rites: >>> In message <99Mar16.183042est.40331@border.alcanet.com.au>, Peter Jerem= y writes >>> : >>>>I'm looking at buying a new system to augment my aging 486DX2-50. >>>> >>>>Would anyone like to comment on either a Tekram P5MVP-B4 with a K6-2 >>>>processor, or a Tekram BX-series with a P-II? (I prefer the K6-2 >>>>because I see no reason to support Intel's virtual monopoly). >> >>Then surely you've looked at buying Celerons first, right? :-) >=20 > No, they're almost twice as expensive for the same performance... Not the same performance, nor are they twice as expensive (almost or not)... Performance wise, Celeron runs its cache at full CPU speed--not the Bus Speed (usually around 100Mhz now). Plus you can trivially overclock it to 467Mhz (this is what I've done). The Intel BX motherboard costs a mighty $30 more on the average than the VIA or Alladin equivalent boards (I wont go into the arguments why it is better). The CPU costs are pretty much exactly the same (K6-2/333 is the same as a Celeron 333 on the site I just checked). So for $30 more you can get an Intel chipset, run the Celeron overclocked at whatever you want, with full cache speed (to whatever you overclock). That is about $230<intel/celeron> vs $200<alt/k6>. The Celeron may have less cache overall, but its running anywhere from 3 to nearly 5 times faster than the K6 would be. Actually, I will comment on performance. I'm a part owner of a local PC chop shop. We repair computers all over (businesses primarily), and based simply off our experience we will never install anything but Intel chipsets. The others are problematic, drivers are buggy and in the long run we have had too many problems with them. I cannot back this up with anything other than pure experience. The systems which are intel based run cleaner and better than those which are not. This is based on wintel machines. I personally would love to see somebody bump the intel monpoly, but currently intel holds the top position in quality and performance. K6-3 does help quite a bit with this, and the K7 (if it turns out like they are saying) probably WILL do it. But for now, you have the celeron. So my suggestion? Get an ASUS P2B with a Celeron 300A (if you still can) and overclock it to 467Mhz. Its what I've done at home, it rocks, I love it, and will probably be building another system just like it for my development box. -Brandon --IJpNTDwzlM2Ie8A6 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: PGPfreeware 5.0i for non-commercial use MessageID: 5zADNDDgw4qDuM+uR/kELcPZw+XfrsVC iQA/AwUBNu5vMUv5XoQiMgn6EQIYPwCgnHyCSQwtjzL6m0OaooGv7Gfk4QUAoPbl wUM1Q2hfRraJM/TROnZeTiPV =u0GO -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --IJpNTDwzlM2Ie8A6-- To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hardware" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?19990316074818.A23561>