On Fri, 05 Jun 1998, Joe Cooper wrote:
>It is claimed by IDT's info that these chips have been tested with Linux
>as well as numerous other alternate OS's. However, they are 'optimized'
>(their word not mine) for Windows systems. Why they call them optimized
I wonder how you go about optimizing a chip for one OS and not another.
>when they are slower under nearly all circumstances than their
>competitors at similar clock speeds continues to baffle me.
Even so, unless they lack some important feature and are thus crippled,
such as no L2 cache, and (for instance) a 200 mhz part runs like a 175,
it's still faster than a 100, and if it's cheaper than an equivalent 175
mhz Intel part it may be worth it.
>Nonetheless, a local computer reseller here in Houston
>(http://www.chipsmart.com) offers up a well equipped Winchip box
>(200MHz, 32MB ram, 2 meg video, 2.1 HD, etc.) for $399... A poor design
And it's possible (given the above supposition) that a 'real' 200 mhz
based system may be somewhat more expensive. If the expense doesn't
really justify the extra speed then you may be better off with the
cheaper CPU.
I don't know how much a 200 mhz Winchip compares to a similar-speed
Intel (or AMD etc). From what I've heard, the sweet spot in terms of
price/performance is 266 mhz.
>Joe Cooper <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Now Playing:Mission Of Burma--signals, calls, and marches
--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
David E. Fox Tax Thanks for letting me
[EMAIL PROTECTED] the change magnetic patterns
[EMAIL PROTECTED] churches on your hard disk.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
--
PLEASE read the Red Hat FAQ, Tips, Errata and the MAILING LIST ARCHIVES!
http://www.redhat.com/RedHat-FAQ /RedHat-Errata /RedHat-Tips /mailing-lists
To unsubscribe: mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] with
"unsubscribe" as the Subject.
