rec.autos.simulators

by **Simon Goodwi** » Wed, 21 Oct 1998 04:00:00

Can I get a concensus on the better choice (I'm certainly willing to
overclock these CPUs). Please don't suggest others as this is the most I
can afford right now!

Thanks,
Simon

by **John Moor** » Wed, 21 Oct 1998 04:00:00

My friend is running a K6-2 300 and is not having to much luck at
overclocking it. I haven't worked on his system but I think his mobo is the
problem. On the other hand I run an Abit bx6 and a celeron 300A ( very
important to get the A ) and after running it at 300 for a few days I upped
it to 338, then 374, and now at 450 with no problems. After much research I
did up the cpu voltage a tad and have added lots of cooling. Awesome!

by **Lake** » Wed, 21 Oct 1998 04:00:00

Go back to the archives and search for Celeron or overclocking. Think the
verdict was the 300a or 333a but variations within the cpu stamp could be
identified as better for o/clocking.
Tony

>My friend is running a K6-2 300 and is not having to much luck at
>overclocking it. I haven't worked on his system but I think his mobo is the
>problem. On the other hand I run an Abit bx6 and a celeron 300A ( very
>important to get the A ) and after running it at 300 for a few days I upped
>it to 338, then 374, and now at 450 with no problems. After much research I
>did up the cpu voltage a tad and have added lots of cooling. Awesome!

>> Can I get a concensus on the better choice (I'm certainly willing to
>> overclock these CPUs). Please don't suggest others as this is the most I
>> can afford right now!

>> Thanks,
>> Simon

by **Nathan Won** » Wed, 21 Oct 1998 04:00:00

> Can I get a concensus on the better choice (I'm certainly willing to
> overclock these CPUs). Please don't suggest others as this is the most I
> can afford right now!

follow what everyone else is doing and you can't go wrong. Celeron 300a.

by **Pau** » Wed, 21 Oct 1998 04:00:00

Clearly Celeron is the choice if you intend to overclock, AMD if you
don't. I have AMD K6-2 300 and am very satisfied with it's default

by **Bill Ryde** » Thu, 22 Oct 1998 04:00:00

> Can I get a concensus on the better choice (I'm certainly willing to
> overclock these CPUs). Please don't suggest others as this is the most I
> can afford right now!

I love my K6-2 300:

For quake it kicks celerons ass.
It runs GPL well (I run in a field of 8 cars normally, 800x600,
all details on in normal view,
Turned off some things in mirror but keep cars,
car textures, track texture)
Get around 20fps at starts (I'm always at the back :-)
Usually getting around 30fps.
Unreal runs well.
I am expecting even better performance when 3dfx sorts out the dx6 drivers.
It is not an intel (competition is good !)

I have a mvp3 motherboard. Couldn't overclock though (tried voltage changing and other stuff).

Bill

by **Chath** » Thu, 22 Oct 1998 04:00:00

> > Can I get a concensus on the better choice (I'm certainly willing to
> > overclock these CPUs). Please don't suggest others as this is the most I
> > can afford right now!

> I love my K6-2 300:

> For quake it kicks celerons ass.
> It runs GPL well (I run in a field of 8 cars normally, 800x600,
> all details on in normal view,
> Turned off some things in mirror but keep cars,
> car textures, track texture)
> Get around 20fps at starts (I'm always at the back :-)
> Usually getting around 30fps.
> Unreal runs well.
> I am expecting even better performance when 3dfx sorts out the dx6 drivers.
> It is not an intel (competition is good !)

> I have a mvp3 motherboard. Couldn't overclock though (tried voltage changing and other stuff).

> Bill

Go here for a comparesment........
http://epsilon.silicon.net.my/adrian/Reviews/K62_Celeron_Comparison/K6-
2_Celeron_Comparison_1.htm

by **Mikko Harjul** » Fri, 23 Oct 1998 04:00:00

> Clearly Celeron is the choice if you intend to overclock, AMD if you
> don't. I have AMD K6-2 300 and am very satisfied with it's default

I believe it's quite well known that K6-2 gives better bang/buck in
integer computations and Celeron in floating point. The big guestion
is that which games use intensive floating point and which don't! I
guess nobody knows because I haven't seen this discussed at all.

The next question would be: does most of this floating point
calculation occur in the D3D level. If yes, then 3D-Now DX drivers
could change the situation in floating point games also, otherwise
not. Does anyone really know?

Easies way to find out would be to have two comparable systems side by
side with both processors and try the games in question. The "I
upgraded my 486 to processor X and it kicks ass!" comment really
doesn't answer the posters original question "do I get better
horsepower for my money with Celeron or K6-2?". It may be helpfull in
determining "I reallly want to play game X, would system (fill in your
processor, display card, memory) be sufficient to play it?"

--
Mikko Harjula SQ Consulting Oy | If you email me from a

tel. +358-3-3165206 33720 Tampere | use subject "I AM NOT SPAM"
fax +358-3-3165201 FINLAND |

by **Nathan Wo** » Sat, 24 Oct 1998 04:00:00

>> Can I get a concensus on the better choice (I'm certainly willing to
>> overclock these CPUs). Please don't suggest others as this is the most I
>> can afford right now!

>follow what everyone else is doing and you can't go wrong. Celeron 300a.

I was wondering what I wrote here!!!! :-)

I wonder how many times this has happened to people here?

--
Nathan Wong http://www.nectar.com.au/~alfacors
- Super Touring - Alfa Romeo -

- V8Supercars - CART -

rec.autos.simulators

HELP: Celery 300 vs AMD K6 II 300

HELP: Celery 300 vs AMD K6 II 300

HELP: Celery 300 vs AMD K6 II 300

HELP: Celery 300 vs AMD K6 II 300

HELP: Celery 300 vs AMD K6 II 300

HELP: Celery 300 vs AMD K6 II 300

HELP: Celery 300 vs AMD K6 II 300

HELP: Celery 300 vs AMD K6 II 300

HELP: Celery 300 vs AMD K6 II 300

HELP: Celery 300 vs AMD K6 II 300