agreed. I think why the amd's slow down as they get higher in mhz is that
the on chip cache is 64k compared to 128k for the celerons. The celerons
went faster while the k6/2's and k6/3's stopped at 550 mhz. They couldn't
get em to go any faster w/ the chip architecture they had. It's either that
or the k6/2-k6/3's were meant for low end systems and never meant to have
more than 128 megs of ram?
Broc Olson < Byark!>
----- Original Message -----
From: t-pot <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, September 26, 2001 5:08 PM
Subject: Re: RAM, etc.
>
> ive got an amd k6-2 400 that pushed out a WU every 24hrs with 64mb
> i had 384mb in it an was dribbleing out a WU every 36-48 hrs
> took the 384 and put it in a system runnin a celery 300a @ 450 and its
> kickin em out every 12hrs
> so the on board cache things seems to make sence to me
> plus ive heard that before with problems people have with amd k6 while
> playin Quake
> seems a slower pentium/celery with the same mem will have more fps than
the
> amd
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Wednesday, September 26, 2001 10:00 AM
> Subject: Re: RAM, etc.
>
>
==
Unsubscribe instructions: http://www.talkspace.net/mlists/setiathome.html
This list sponsored by talkspace.net: building space communities online.
Mailing list services provided by klx.communications -- www.klx.com
