2 results:
P3 933Mhz 256MB RDRAM i820 chipset
193.170 seconds

P3 1400Mhz 256MB SDRAM PC133(cl3) i815 chipset
126.150 seconds

Edit:Btw, I remember I once made a thread about SuperPi.
I looked it up, it's here:
Post your retro computer superpi results here!

Edit2:I think it kinda ended because we (I 😜) wanted a bootable floppy which could run SuperPi 🤣

MDK2 demo for a benchmark is fine too

Don't forget to benchmark with a T&L supporting card to find differences. A Geforce2 GTS should work, as should a Radeon 7500

I'm gonna need to find an Early T&L Video card for those tests, I don't have an AGP card newer than a V3-3000 in my collection, next lowest is a V4 4500 PCI and an X800GTO PCIe 😜

maddmaxstar wrote:

next lowest is a V4 4500 PCI and an X800GTO PCIe 😜

No need to hate on the lowly V4.

I just slapped a V4 4500 AGP in my P3 1.4S system (listed in sig) with Evolution drivers. Test aren't too bad with 3DMark2k1SE

1024x768@16Bit: 2215
1024x768@32Bit: 1661

These are with everything stock speed CPU/VID.

Its a Powercolor EvilKing 4 "L-card". I'm gonna start testing it with older games as it seems there is some broken compatibility with VSA100 chips.

EDIT: Here is my 3Dmark2001SE on a AMD 960T @ 4.2GHz

1024x768@32Bit: 48610

Makes me wonder how well i'd get with a 560Ti vs. my GTX260 (192SP)

Posted a SuperPi thread here:
The All-amazing super-de-douper SuperPi thread!

RogueTrip2012 wrote:

I just slapped a V4 4500 AGP in my P3 1.4S system (listed in sig) with Evolution drivers. Test aren't too bad with 3DMark2k1SE

1024x768@16Bit: 2215
1024x768@32Bit: 1661

I guess this means I'll be hooking up my Voodoo4 4500 PCI. Mines the original 3DFX version from 2000, a friend of mine gave it to me after he got a new card waaaaay back in 2003. I've never benchmarked it, though I've always heard it's performance was mediocre and wondered how it compared to the Voodoo3's.

Do you know if those Evolution drivers are compatible with the Voodoo3 as well as 4? If so, I'll try testing it alongside my Voodoo3 2000 PCI in my P3 setup - it's easier if I can just swap it out.

Nope, drivers only work with V4/V5. Although the newest 3dfx tools will work on both cards.

Its easy enough to install driver cleaner 2 and boot to safe mode to clean the 3dfx drivers (do atleast 2 passes). I also do a "remove" in device manager after cleaning.

The V4 4500 should be on par with a V3 3500. It does have the 32MB of ram though which can help at higher resolutions. The Evo drivers also allow you to try to make the CPU do T&L emulation although I don't know how good it is as I haven't messed with that part.

The part I've noticed is some games I haven't gotten to work with the V4/V5 like Powerslide and Ultimate Race Pro. Didn't spend alot of time trying to make it work and is the reason I want to mess with it a bit more.

I just finished doing a slew more Benchmarks. I wasn't able to get the Cyrix chips running (the MII 366 wouldn't post and the board doesn't have a 1.5x multiplyer for the PR200+), but I did get my K6 266, K6-2 333 and K6-2 500 chips running to simulate the bulk of the K6-2 line in other benchmarks. I ran SuperPi on all of them and those results are posted in the SuperPi thread.

However I did find my copy of SiSoft Sandra 2001te Pro to run on several chips, the results are as follows:

= K6 300 (K6 266 @ 3x100) =

= K6-2 300 (K6-2 333 @ 3x100) =

= K6-2 350 (K6-2 333 @ 3.5x100) =
(I made an error on this screenshot, the wrong tab on CPU-Z is shown. However it's the same chip as the 300 benchmark at a different clock speed.)

= K6-2 400 (K6-2 500 @ 4x100) =

= K6-2 450 (K6-2 500 @ 4.5x100) =

= K6-2 500 =

= K6-2+ 500 =

= Athlon 550 =
(note: the CPU is misidentified as a Pluto core, it's actually a K7 Argon. Case in point, the Pluto core was 0.18um, not 0.25)

= Athlon 700 =

I also added in some Skt 370 chips from the following system:
AOpen M3XW Pro-V i810/Voodoo3 2000 PCI/512mb PC133/WinXP

= Celeron 466 (Mendocino) =

= Celeron 800 (Coppermine-128) =

= Pentium III 650 (Coppermine, 6.5x100) =

I also fired up my Socket 939 system and grabbed some results from it:
MSI Skt939 ATi Xpress200+X800GTO(16)/1GB DDR400(1x512+2x256, single channel)/Win7x64

= Athlon 64 3700+ (2.2GHz San Diego, 1MB L2) =
It should be noted that this machine uses a 256mb Radeon X800GTO, with the BIOS flashed to unlock all 4 Quads, it's a bit faster than a Voodoo3, but I didn't install any special drivers, just the stock drivers for Win7.

And of course, I have to throw my main machine in...
= Phenom II X6 1090T (3.2GHz Thuban, 9mb total L2/L3 Cache) =
Note in this benchmark I didn't change the CPUs it was stacked up against. I thought it looked kinda cool decimating an 8way PIII Xeon system 😜

2.9V or 2.2V Cyrix MII-366GP?

feipoa wrote:

2.9V or 2.2V Cyrix MII-366GP?

2.9v. Labeled "M II-366GP"

That's too bad; the MII-366, 400, and 433 chips with 2.2V markings are rumoured to be the overclockable units. Anyone have any luck with an MII at 333-400 MHz for continuous stable operation?

feipoa wrote:

Anyone have any luck with an MII at 333-400 MHz for continuous stable operation?

I tried briefly recently, but that Rambus rig I build kinda took over. I got 333's and a few 400's waiting to be tested/benchmarked

Same here; lots of stuff in the pipeline for testing.

I happen to have a Cyrix MII-366GP at 2.2v and one at 2.9v. I'm curious to compare their overclockabilities. I also want to compare the overclockability of the Cyrix MII-400GP 2.2v with the MII-366GP 2.2v.

I'm confused why Cyrix bothered to produce the MII-400GP using a 95 MHz FSB (3x). It is as if the onboard Cyrix PLL multiplier couldn't quite handle multiplying 100 MHz. I suppose running at 2.5 x 100 will answer this question. And what did Cyrix do differently with the MII-433GP (compared to the MII-400GP) which then allowed for the straight forward 3 x 100 MHz?

feipoa wrote:

Same here; lots of stuff in the pipeline for testing.

I happen to have a Cyrix MII-366GP at 2.2v and one at 2.9v. I'm curious to compare their overclockabilities. I also want to compare the overclockability of the Cyrix MII-400GP 2.2v with the MII-366GP 2.2v.

I'm confused why Cyrix bothered to produce the MII-400GP using a 95 MHz FSB (3x). It is as if the onboard Cyrix PLL multiplier couldn't quite handle multiplying 100 MHz. I suppose running at 2.5 x 100 will answer this question. And what did Cyrix do differently with the MII-433GP (compared to the MII-400GP) which then allowed for the straight forward 3 x 100 MHz?

I really don't know.

These 2.2v Cyrix chips must be really poor overclockers if they can't even be pushed a lousy 15 Mhz 😵

feipoa wrote:

Same here; lots of stuff in the pipeline for testing.

I happen to have a Cyrix MII-366GP at 2.2v and one at 2.9v. I'm curious to compare their overclockabilities. I also want to compare the overclockability of the Cyrix MII-400GP 2.2v with the MII-366GP 2.2v.

I'm confused why Cyrix bothered to produce the MII-400GP using a 95 MHz FSB (3x). It is as if the onboard Cyrix PLL multiplier couldn't quite handle multiplying 100 MHz. I suppose running at 2.5 x 100 will answer this question. And what did Cyrix do differently with the MII-433GP (compared to the MII-400GP) which then allowed for the straight forward 3 x 100 MHz?

They may not have done anything differently. The 433GP chips may just be cherry picked parts from the 400GP production run that were able to handle the additional 5mhz bus speed, which would also explain their rarity.

Yeah, that and I think they were released just before National Semiconductor sold Cyrix to VIA and the MII was shelved in favour of C3. Still, I wish I could find a 2.2v chip - just to see if the die shrink is any faster clock-for-clock.

I have a K6-2+ 500, but no motherboard to suit it! 🙁

SquallStrife wrote:

I have a K6-2+ 500, but no motherboard to suit it! 🙁

Do you have anything with a i430TX chipset? I know some of those boards have hacked BIOS's available to support faster chips like the K6-2+. I have an Asus TX97-E board in one system, I installed a hacked BIOS to support a 6x multiplier and more CPU strings. Right now I have it running a K6-2 400, but it'll run a K6-2+ 500 at 6x83MHz (though I wouldn't push it any higher than 6x75 for 450MHz since the 83Mhz bus might throw the PCI bus a bit wonky).

The PLL clock generator on my Intel TX board can support both synchronous or asynchronous PCI bus operation, whereby the synchronous PCI clock will be some scalar multiple of the FSB, and asynchronous PCI clock will be a fixed 32 MHz no matter what FSB is being run. Asynchronous operation is enabled by setting BSEL=0.

While it is unlikely that the motherboard can be run asynchronously, has anyone measured their PCI clock frequency with an 83.3 MHz FSB?

For synchronous operation, the PCI clock typically runs at 41.7 MHz (when the FSB is set to 83.3 MHz). Wasn't 66 MHz operation added in PCI revision 2.1? So even if your PCI bus is running at 41.7 MHz, couldn't you just use, say, all PCI rev 2.2 cards without an issue?

I wish I did! 😀

The closest thing I have is a Jetway TX-98B, which isn't really a TX board at all.

It's the only board I have that'll run my Tillamook MMX with cache enabled.