rec.autos.simulators

by **Pekka Hei** » Fri, 11 Apr 1997 04:00:00

I am using an AMD-K6-200 cpu for Nascar2. It works in rendition mode
(I am using the Intergraph-card) just fine and there are no quirks in
steering as there is with Cyrix-chips (even though I am running the
poor chip at 2,5 x 83MHz).

Can't yet say if the AMD is faster than Intel's 200MHz chips but it
certainly doesn't look to be slower...

I am not sure if this is old news, I just remembered few people asking
for AMD-K6/Nascar2 comments.

Greetings,

Pekka Heino
_____________

by **Koit** » Wed, 16 Apr 1997 04:00:00

<HTML><BODY>
What motherboard are you using?
 
 Cheers

<BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE>I am using an AMD-K6-200 cpu for Nascar2. It works
in rendition mode
 (I am using the Intergraph-card) just fine and there are no quirks in
 steering as there is with Cyrix-chips (even though I am running the
 poor chip at 2,5 x 83MHz).
 
 Can't yet say if the AMD is faster than Intel's 200MHz chips but it
 certainly doesn't look to be slower...
 
 I am not sure if this is old news, I just remembered few people asking
 for AMD-K6/Nascar2 comments.
 
 Greetings,
 
 Pekka Heino
 _____________

</BLOCKQUOTE>

</BODY>
</HTML>

by **Eric T. Busc** » Thu, 17 Apr 1997 04:00:00

Um... whay would you want him to go from 208mhz (83x2.5) to 225mhz (75x3)?
If anything, the system might even be a bit slower at 225 due to the bus
speed.

--

by **John Wallac** » Fri, 18 Apr 1997 04:00:00

> >Um... whay would you want him to go from 208mhz (83x2.5) to 225mhz
(75x3)?
> >If anything, the system might even be a bit slower at 225 due to the bus
> >speed.

> I know that.. Just trying to see how far the K6 will go.. that's
> all...

Actually it's almost certain that the system would be faster at 75x3 than
it was at 83x2.5 in my opinion.

In the past bus-speed was more important since it was the rate determining
step of overall system performance. The problem is that most systems can't
handle 83Mhz efficiently and memory access will be slower since wait states
will need to be implemented for error-free operation. Added to this the
quantisation errors which also manifest themselves and the fact that many
people have to drop the access mode of their hard drive and it's soon
obvious that a system at 225 will generally ve faster than one at 208.

Of course this is not true in theory - a well configured and perfectly
operational system at 208 will normally be faster than the same system at
225, but most people don't have the required components to support that.

by **Pekka Hei** » Sat, 19 Apr 1997 04:00:00

On Thu, 17 Apr 1997 12:27:49 GMT, "John Wallace"

>Actually it's almost certain that the system would be faster at 75x3 than
>it was at 83x2.5 in my opinion.

The speed difference in my tests is very small and in some programs
the bus speed gives slightly better results and in others the CPU
speed works better. I'd say use the clock speed with which your
machine (or you yourself) feel more comfortable. I haven't had
problems with either speed and I am sticking to 2,5*83MHz (at least
until the 233, 266 and 300MHz versions are readily available).

I was lucky in that I didn't have to make any compromises in BIOS
settings regarding my components. PIO modes are on auto, wait states
are at 1WS, memory timing set to 60ns (I have 60ns EDOs) etc. and
everything works OK.

Greetings,

Pekka Heino
_____________

rec.autos.simulators

Some AMD-K6 comments

Some AMD-K6 comments

Some AMD-K6 comments

Some AMD-K6 comments

Some AMD-K6 comments

Some AMD-K6 comments