Cyrix vs Intel

Hi all, I am looking for some info on which is the better processor for simulators. I am going to be buying a new Pc within the month or 2. I am looking at a Intel Pentium 200 or the cyrix 200+. Which would be better for the current racing sims and future racing sims. Which is faster, and would allow me to have full graphics. What are the cons if any on them. I heard that the cyrix might not have a floating point unit... Is this true and if so, how important is that... Later, Andrew -- --------------------------------- Andrew Heckman, Help Desk Manager Academic Computing and Strategic Technologies Nova Southeastern University, Ft. Lauderdale, FL WWW: http://www.nova.edu/~help

Quoted text (9 lines)

> Hi all, > I am looking for some info on which is the better processor for > simulators. I am going to be buying a new Pc within the month or 2. I > am looking at a Intel Pentium 200 or the cyrix 200+. Which would be > better for the current racing sims and future racing sims. Which is faster, > and would allow me to have full graphics. What are the cons if any on them. > I heard that the cyrix might not have a floating point unit... Is this > true and if so, how important is that...

Per PC World, Oct, 1996 page 51... "Owners of PC's based on Cyrex's 6x86 processors have reported trouble running some popular games because Windows 95 fials to recognize the Cyrix 6x86 CPU. Users trying to play games such as Papyrus NASCAR Racing...may get error messages telling them the yneed a Pentium. ...... At press time, no fix was available from Cyrix" Now that I have contributed to this group, I have a simple question. Is there any trick to getting Nascar to run under Win95? I have the sound working now (SB16) but it wont recognise that a joystick is plugged into the SB16. Win95 does see the joystick though.... thanks, Stay away from Cyrix for now! -- Daniel Robino DR Computer http://www.ntplx.net/~drobino

Cyrix cpu's work fine!!! I've been running my P150+ for over a month with no problems (oc 166+). Just get an approved motherboard (list available at www.cyrix.com). Floating point performance is slower than Intel cpu's but there are currently no racing sims that use it anyway. Quake seems to be the only game adversely affected by a Cyrix cpu. As for the Nascar/win95 problem, it sound like you are trying to run in a window. You have to reboot to dos before you run the game. You might have to add new config.sys and autoexec.bat setups in the propery menu also that only load the required drivers. Dole/Kemp '96 ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Patrick L. Dotson Delco Electronics IWCC #98 Mountain Dew Kokomo, Indiana Oldsmobile Audio Systems Can-Am Motor Sports R328 1-1293 Mechanical Design Engineer Chevrolet-Monte Carlo ------------------------------------------------------------------------- "Extremism in defense of liberty is no vice" - Barry Goldwater "Defense of liberty is not extreme" - me

Daniel, PC World may be correct, but remember Nascar is a Dos based game! The best way to run it in Win95 is do not. I think the problem with chip recognition is a MS issue or software not Cyrix, and should not make the Crix a no buy. If enough people do continue to have a problem, I am sure the problem will be ferreted out. The more Cyrix chips sold the more everyone will have to make sure of compatability issues. I wish Cyrix could upgrade the fpu so Cyrix could be the clear choice for all sims, (including Quake) .Cyrix has $200 to $800 per unit to figure it out ; ; -)The Cyrix Corp is on our side, you know more for less. Intel is overcharging all of us for their product. Lack of competition enables them to do that, I think most of the big pc mags out there should have an Intel Inside sticker ;-D or at the very least a Win95 compatible lablel. I wonder how much those huge pull outs adverti***ts cost anyway... (probably $200 to $800 per unit...how convienent ;) I really wish that some of the writers would pose the question, with as many chips as Intel produces why is the cost per unit based on clock speed rather than real production figures? I mean most Intel 133s are just 166s with a different label, that is why overclocking works so well now. Or maybe why can Cyrix smoke your product for almost half of the cost? These chips come off of the same line and are only stamped different. The government is so worried someone will see a tit, instead of sticking thier nose into why Intel can basicly charge whatever they want, and instigate scare tactics against what should be a close competitor. I really did not car about this until I saw a few of the same articles like this ( INTEL releases P6! ) this is on the cover right, so I read the article on page 4 in huge layout and it says "P6 shows almost no gains in speed at all, (except true 32 bit apps)" In the same mags on page 143 split up over 3 pages in different parts in regular script" Cyrix chip beats Intel in every real world catagory, at almost half price." I saw and see this over and over, they tell us it is a good product, but with no emphasis. I think it is a big deal. If you are still reading this you might say " what in the world does this have to do with ras?" CPUs equal horsepower that is what, and I want as many horses as I can afford. I say Cyrix is by far the best deal! Nascar2, Indycar2 and Grand Prix 2 all are dos based games, and the Cyrix will run them on average 20% faster and 40% cheaper. Anyone considering spending the big bucks for an upgrade should do real research on what is best for them. *disclaimer: I do not run OS2, Linux, Unix and do not think Bill Gates is the Borg. I have and do own Intel products, and am not employed by Cyrix :-) RacerX

Win95 recognizes my 166+ as a 390 MHz 486, NT 4.0 saya its an 80486-CyrixInstead, I've never once had a problem running software thats supposbly pentium enhanced. For example, the icr2 win95 patch's install program tells me I have a 133 MHz cyrix x86, which DOES NOT meet the requirments of a pentium 60 ( ..!.. ), tells me it wont run, and to install the DOS version. Ignore that, and it still runs fine. I've always wondered where the reports that this chip wont run some software come from, does anybody think it would get the "made for Windows 95" logo if it DIDN'T run a bunch of stuff? AutoCad 13 was supposed to be the worst, but it never has complained. As for the 95 questions, believe me, it aint worth your trouble IMO. Lets face it, even for games written for 95, they wont run anywhere near the same because there is ALWAYS the overhead of a multi-tasking operating system eating up some memory and cpu time...witness indycar 2. Why go to all the trouble when you just have to click twice to run in native dos mode like papyrus intended?

<snip long essay about Intel and Cyrix> Well said - it was really interesting. _________ Richard Sobey <http://www.conad.demon.co.uk>

I've run ICR2 and NFS SE on a Intel P100 and a Cyrix 6x86 166mhz under win95. I haven't had any problems with the Cyrix. It blows away the P100 in performance and was a good deal. For $600 I upgraded a 486 clone with a new motherboard (PCI), 166mhz 6x86, 16mb EDO RAM, Trident video card w/1mb ram, and a 8x CDROM. Its performance makes it tough to go back to NFS on the P100 (with 16mb EDO, 128bit #9 Imagine card, and NFS loaded to disk)... dj

Quoted text (74 lines)

> >Per PC World, Oct, 1996 page 51... > >"Owners of PC's based on Cyrex's 6x86 processors have reported trouble > >running some popular games because Windows 95 fials to recognize the > >Cyrix 6x86 CPU. Users trying to play games such as Papyrus NASCAR > >Racing...may get error messages telling them the yneed a Pentium. > >...... > >At press time, no fix was available from Cyrix" > >Now that I have contributed to this group, I have a simple question. Is > >there any trick to getting Nascar to run under Win95? I have the sound > >working now (SB16) but it wont recognise that a joystick is plugged into > >the SB16. Win95 does see the joystick though.... > >thanks, > >Stay away from Cyrix for now! > >-- > >Daniel Robino > >DR Computer > >[link lost in import: /~drobino] > Daniel, > PC World may be correct, but remember Nascar is a Dos based game! The > best way to run it in Win95 is do not. I think the problem with chip > recognition is a MS issue or software not Cyrix, and should not make > the Crix a no buy. If enough people do continue to have a problem, I > am sure the problem will be ferreted out. > The more Cyrix chips sold the more everyone will have to make sure > of compatability issues. I wish Cyrix could upgrade the fpu so Cyrix > could be the clear choice for all sims, (including Quake) .Cyrix has > $200 to $800 per unit to figure it out ; ; -)The Cyrix Corp is on our > side, you know more for less. Intel is overcharging all of us for > their product. Lack of competition enables them to do that, I think > most of the big pc mags out there should have an Intel Inside sticker > ;-D or at the very least a Win95 compatible lablel. I wonder how much > those huge pull outs adverti***ts cost anyway... (probably $200 to > $800 per unit...how convienent ;) > I really wish that some of the writers would pose the question, with > as many chips as Intel produces why is the cost per unit based on > clock speed rather than real production figures? I mean most Intel > 133s are just 166s with a different label, that is why overclocking > works so well now. Or maybe why can Cyrix smoke your product for > almost half of the cost? These chips come off of the same line and > are only stamped different. > The government is so worried someone will see a tit, instead of > sticking thier nose into why Intel can basicly charge whatever they > want, and instigate scare tactics against what should be a close > competitor. > I really did not car about this until I saw a few of the same > articles like this ( INTEL releases P6! ) this is on the cover right, > so I read the article on page 4 in huge layout and it says "P6 shows > almost no gains in speed at all, (except true 32 bit apps)" In the > same mags on page 143 split up over 3 pages in different parts in > regular script" Cyrix chip beats Intel in every real world catagory, > at almost half price." I saw and see this over and over, they tell us > it is a good product, but with no emphasis. I think it is a big deal. > If you are still reading this you might say " what in the world > does this have to do with ras?" > CPUs equal horsepower that is what, and I want as many horses as I > can afford. I say Cyrix is by far the best deal! > Nascar2, Indycar2 and Grand Prix 2 all are dos based games, and the > Cyrix will run them on average 20% faster and 40% cheaper. Anyone > considering spending the big bucks for an upgrade should do real > research on what is best for them. > *disclaimer: I do not run OS2, Linux, Unix and do not think Bill Gates > is the Borg. > I have and do own Intel products, and am not employed by Cyrix :-) > RacerX

I own a P166+ and a just got a Hercules Dynamite 128 and quake rocks!. I think VESA speed plays a bigger role in quake than most people are aware of, not just FPU. I now have the best of both worlds (Quake and GP2)

RacerX wrote [snip] [snip] Actually, all CPUs manufactured by Intel are designed to be as fast as possible (200mHz+). The reason for the different speed ratings on CPUs is due to the uneven heat distribution when 'cooking' the batch of chips. Therefore in one batch, the ideally cooked are 200s the overheated ones are 166s, 133s, 120s etc...They slower chips are more brittle and likely to develop faults when running at higher speeds. The reason overclocking works well with Intels especially is the fact that the latest breed have inbuilt temperature sensors which monitor overheating. Overclocking WILL reduce the life of a CPU no matter what. Luckily the life of a CPU (even overclocked) extends well beyond the useful life as new CPUs are manufactured and supersede the old. With a bit of sneaky wiring, I have configured an overclocking system which alters the bus speed and multiplication factor on my pentium m/b via the now useless turbo switch (which only turns off the cache on 486 and above CPUs) I only use it occaisionally and NEVER change with the machine running. It's also very messy wiring :-) This is my major concern with the Cyrix, as they do tend to run much hotter than the Intel. What is the lifetime going to be? How much more heat will it generate if overclocked? If you're going to overclock a Cyrix - make sure you have a GREAT heatsink and fan to protect it. If I'm wrong on any of the above please let me know, 'cos I'd like to know.

Jason, the reason Cyri\x cpus run so hot is the way they are manufactured. IBM , untill recently, made 6x86 for them. The transistors and internals are made .6 microns ( millionths of an inch ) wide....like the intel cpus up till the 100 MHz model ( i think..). Intel has moved on to a .35 micron system as the way to make the same cpu design able to run at faster clock speeds ( that and running them at lower voltages ). It's not hard to imagine why the Cyrix runs hotter when you think of the millions of transistors that are .25 microns wider ( ...!...). I do NOT expect this little space heater of a P166+ I have here to last for years and years at this temp, but 2 years is the warranty :-)

Quoted text (13 lines)

> The reason overclocking works well with Intels especially is the > fact that the latest breed have inbuilt temperature sensors which > monitor overheating. Overclocking WILL reduce the life of a CPU > no matter what. Luckily the life of a CPU (even overclocked) > extends well beyond the useful life as new CPUs are manufactured > and supersede the old. > With a bit of sneaky wiring, I have configured an overclocking system > which alters the bus speed and multiplication factor on my > pentium m/b via the now useless turbo switch (which only turns > off the cache on 486 and above CPUs) I only use it occaisionally > and NEVER change with the machine running. > It's also very messy wiring :-)

I know I'm following myself up, but I've had a bit of email regarding overclocking procedures, so as well as replying, I thought it might be useful to others if they want more info. For more info, try the following web sites. for 486 machines... http://www.cs.purdue.edu/homes/brownew/overclock.html for Pentiums and Cyrix http://sysdoc.pair.com/overclock.html#Overclocking The latter is cool! Jet

I wouldn't call 20% more heat dissipation "much hotter." I think the 150MHz 6x86 dissipates about 25 Watts, which is a lot less than most workstation CPUs. Take a look at the heat sinks on a MIPS R10000 or a DEC Alpha sometime! My recommendations: 1) Put a heat sink and fan on every CPU you have. 2) Don't overclock your CPUs. \\|// Wallace J. Bow, ***jock (o o) [link lost in import] ------------oOOo-(_)-oOOo---------------------------------------------- Voice: (505) 275-3969 Data/NASCAR Racing: (505) 291-6417

says... > > The reason overclocking works well with Intels especially is the > > fact that the latest breed have inbuilt temperature sensors which > > monitor overheating. Overclocking WILL reduce the life of a CPU No offense, but I don't think there are temperature sensors in any currently availble chip. Whats it supposed to do? Shut down the chip when it gets to hot? Sure, they loose their value almost as fast as a recent Maserati does... If my p90 lasts another year I'll have to find some use for it - what can one do with all those print severs :-), maybe i'll turn the old box into an ISDN router. Works here to :-) (90 / 120 MHz) ! But for all striving for higher frame rates via a Cyrix update please make sure your mainboard is in fact compatible with the chip. The problem is not the heat dissipated by the chip itself - but the 25 watts that the thing burns will draw heavily on the 5 to 3,5 voltage convertor on the mainboard! If you fry this thing your board will be DEAD. For example only some ASUS boards handle the extra heat correctly - If I remember well they have a "-C" after the porduct code. The P/I-P55T2P4 is NOT certified!!! - see http://www.asus.com.tw/Products/SPEC/P5/pi-p55t2p4.html -> no mention of Cyrix! To sum things up: the Cyrix chip will work in most boards - but better add some cooling for the voltage regulator if your board maker doesn't certify your board for the Cyrix!. E-mail the board manufacturer first - most computer salespeople are completely clueless (at leat here in Essen, Germany) Well - on to some "hot" laps now - have fun! David

Quoted text (10 lines)

>says... >> > The reason overclocking works well with Intels especially is the >> > fact that the latest breed have inbuilt temperature sensors which >> > monitor overheating. Overclocking WILL reduce the life of a CPU >No offense, but I don't think there are temperature sensors in any >currently availble chip. Whats it supposed to do? Shut down the chip when >it gets to hot?

My motherboard has a temperature sensor on it, located under the processor. I'm not sure what happpens if it gets too hot. I agree with you, i've never heard of an on-chip sensor either.

> > > The reason overclocking works well with Intels especially is the > > > fact that the latest breed have inbuilt temperature sensors which > > > monitor overheating. Overclocking WILL reduce the life of a CPU > No offense, but I don't think there are temperature sensors in any > currently availble chip. Whats it supposed to do? Shut down the chip when > it gets to hot? [snip] Intel's chips DO have temp sensors, but the relevance of the data being sent from them is dependant on the machines BIOS and functionality of the mainboard. I install Compaq Proliant series fileservers in networks, and the Compaq FlashROM BIOS takes temperature information from the CPU(s) and activates additional cooling measures and will also slow the processing speed down to protect the CPU(s). This is controlled by the BIOS and the Compaq Insight Manager software which can also warn of an impending CPU failure. Nice software - but full of bugs :-( You will also find that many notebooks such as NEC Versa 4000 series and Toshiba CDT series use both motherboard based sensors and the CPU temp sensor to control the fan and CPU speed. This is to ensure the most valuable use of battery power and to protect the chip from overheating. These are all recent machines, and it may be the more recent Pentiums that support it, but I believe it has been the case since the chips were slightly redesigned (>100mHz) Jet