SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Pastimes : Dream Machine ( Build your own PC )

 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: hal jordan who wrote (7214)4/23/1999 2:12:00 PM
From: Nemer  Read Replies (2) of 14778
 
Hal ---

I usually don't keep chips in any of my boxes long enough to wear them out ...... ggggg

Rich has a point and he has a great deal more experience than I do.

From my point of view --
overclocking --- Celeron
standard --- Pentium
price --- AMD
fun to play with --- Cyrix

This past year or so ---

Of the six or seven Celerons I've used (and overclocked all), I've had no trouble.

Of the three or four Pentiums I've used, I keep thinking that they're supposed to be better because they cost more, but I really haven't found that the P chip does anything that I demand of it any better than the AMD.
Now, granted, my usage might well not be typical of the normal, and Rich is far better in the know of regular usage than am I.

Of the five or six AMDs I've used I've had no trouble.

Most of the readers here already know this, so I won't elaborate on it .... but the Celeron only has 128mg of cache BUT it runs at full processor speed ... ie, Cel400 runs at 400 and its' 112 cache runs at 400. The other processors, P and AMD, have 512mg of cache BUT the cache runs at HALF speed of the CPU.... ie P400 runs at 400 and its' cache runs at 200mz.

Rich and a bunch of others hate Cyrix .....
I've not used one in the past year, but heretofore, I never had any problem with any of them either..... matter of fact, somewhere around here if I haven't thrown it away is an old Cyrix 133 I had overclocked to 200+ and it worked fine until it melted ....... gggg and I have one box as a spare for emergencies that has a Cyrix 133 that I seem to remember I have running at better than 166 with a stripped down Win95 ver and it is amazingly rapid for an old machine.

Way back when, I had a Cyrix 586 overclocked so far up that it was waaaay faster than the then state of the art P1XX ..... it generated so much heat that the only way I could keep it running was with two fans mounted on the chip with a homemade tent looking heat sink and a big 12in fan blowing on the open case ....
and when it gave up the ghost, it took the MB and memory along with it in a blaze of glory .....
My wife wanted to know what the horrible smell was in our home office........ gggggggg

So I guess my answer to your question is that it is up to you what processor you wish to buy ......

Nemer
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext