AMD K6-2 or K6-3

Now i have a AMD K6-2 333Mhz What would be the best AMD to upgrade?? An AMD K6-2 450Mhz or a AMD K6-3 450Mhz?? Should it make a great difference in racegames like RC2000 going from an 333Mhz to a 450 Mhz?? I have a savage4 32Mb AGP and 128 Mb ram Thanks,

K6-3. The Level2 cache is on the chip, and runs at the clock speed (i.e. 450MHz) whereas the K6-2's L2 cache is on the motherboard and runs at 100MHz (or 95 Mhz in your current setup). You should see a noticeable difference. mm

Quoted text (8 lines)

> Now i have a AMD K6-2 333Mhz > What would be the best AMD to upgrade?? > An AMD K6-2 450Mhz or a AMD K6-3 450Mhz?? > Should it make a great difference in racegames like RC2000 going from an > 333Mhz to a 450 Mhz?? > I have a savage4 32Mb AGP and 128 Mb ram > Thanks,

Just yesterday, I sold my K6-2/450 and replaced it with a -3/450. I can't say anything about RC2K, but GPL races show a pronounced (Roughly 20~30+ %) famereate gain. I'm running a SB-Live, 12M-V2, 128M, 1M L2 - oops L3! I'll run some tests tonight. Stay tuned for benchmarks. -- Note! Anti-spam tactics engaged! Remove the duplicate "g" and "s" before replying.

On Mon, 20 Dec 1999 00:26:04 -0800, "Mr Meaner" <[email hidden]> wrote: >K6-3. The Level2 cache is on the chip, and runs at the clock speed (i.e. >450MHz) whereas the K6-2's L2 cache is on the motherboard and runs at 100MHz >(or 95 Mhz in your current setup). >You should see a noticeable difference.Like what? I have a K6-2 400 and a Rendition card, and they give me usually 36 fps at 800x600 offline, with some eye candy turned off, and maybe 20-25 at the start. With an upgrade to K6-III 450, can I get 25-30 fps at the start, or solid 36? Or even switch to 1024x768? I doubt it. >> An AMD K6-2 450Mhz or a AMD K6-3 450Mhz?? I think the question is: is K6-2 500 or K6-III 450 better for GPL, how much better? AFAIR, in general benchmarks, the various AMD K6 CPUs showed very little performance differences above 350MHz (apart from the 366 @66MHz bus of course), especially compared to the price (in money, and in terms of trouble with heat and power consumption etc.). The advantage of the on chip L2 cache depends usually upon the application. So, do I keep my K6-2 400 and save money and trouble, or should I get a 500, or a K6-III 450? -- Matthias Flatt

> I have a K6-2 400 and a Rendition card, and they give me usually 36 > fps at 800x600 offline, with some eye candy turned off, and maybe > 20-25 at the start. > With an upgrade to K6-III 450, can I get 25-30 fps at the start, or > solid 36? Or even switch to 1024x768? I doubt it. With a Celeron 300A running @ 450Mhz I used to run GPL in 1024�768 with one Vooodoo2 with a similar frame rate to what you're getting at 800�600, but with a drop to around 17fps at the start. While I can't comment on a K6-3's suitablility for GPL as I've never owned one, the Celeron had 128k of on chip (full speed) L2 cache. Intel chips do have better FPU performance than AMDs in general, but as Alison Hine says: "I have no experience with the K6-2, although I have run GPL for months on a K6-200 overclocked to 75 x 2 = 225. This processor worked very well, and its superior performance in comparison to my P-233 suggests that the FPU superiority of the Pentium over the AMD K6 was not as important as running the L2 cache at a higher speed" which would suggest the K6-3 would give a noticeable increase in performance in GPL > I think the question is: is K6-2 500 or K6-III 450 better for GPL, how > much better? Can't say for sure, never benchtested one. And I've never used a Rendition card either. > AFAIR, in general benchmarks, the various AMD K6 CPUs showed very > little performance differences above 350MHz (apart from the 366 @66MHz > bus of course), especially compared to the price (in money, and in > terms of trouble with heat and power consumption etc.). > The advantage of the on chip L2 cache depends usually upon the > application. It appears GPL uses the L2 cache heavily from reading Alison's site. > So, do I keep my K6-2 400 and save money and trouble, or should I get > a 500, or a K6-III 450? Up to you. But K6s are dead cheap in England, and I personally would go for a K6-3 over a K6-2. Hope that helps mm

> So, do I keep my K6-2 400 and save money and trouble, or should I get > a 500, or a K6-III 450? If I were you, I'd wait until I could get an Athlon (like a 500 or 550 really cheap). Your not going to see much difference going from a K6-2 400 to either a k6-2 500 or even to a K6-III 450. You will see a major difference between your K6-2 and an Athlon. And to the other post, GPL wants a good floating point unit. GPL doesn't care much about cache, (as is the case with most 3d intensive games).