Fred,
As for future requirements; my understanding is that a main advantage of PII over P is that is runs significantly faster on true 64 bit O/S's. WIN 95 doesn't take advantage of this (since it is still largely a DOS/32bit O/S in drag). But WIN NT (which is becoming more popular, especially in corporations) is true 64 bit and future versions of WIN 95 will be.
All the processors from 386 (including 386sx) all the way to P-II, Deschutes, Katmai are 32 bit processors. Windows OSs took advantage of the 32 bit software only gradually, from Win 2.0 386, Win 3.0, Win 3.1, Win 3.11, Win 95, Win NT. Windows NT is purest 32 bit OS from Microsoft lineup.
It is claimed that P-II runs 32 bit software better than P-MMX. Actually, P-II runs everything better than P-MMX. P-II 233 runs Winstone 95 13.3% faster and Winstone NT 11.7 percent faster than P-MMX 233, according to PC Magazine:
zdnet.com
zdnet.com
The question in my mind is, if you are planning on buying a P200MX why wouldn't you spend $200 more to get a PII-200MX when you know better and more powerful and sophisticated software and operating systems are likely to be just around the corner.
Alternativly, you can spend $100 less and get Cyrix 6x86MX 200 and get a performace boost as well, but a slightly smaller than P-II.
BTW, there is nothing around the corner.
Joe |
