smeezekitty wrote:

lazibayer wrote:

CPU: Pentium Overdrive 83MHz at 40x2.5=100MHz Mobo: FIC 486-GAC-2 RAM: 64MB 60ns FPM OS: XP SP3 […]
Show full quote

CPU: Pentium Overdrive 83MHz at 40x2.5=100MHz
Mobo: FIC 486-GAC-2
RAM: 64MB 60ns FPM
OS: XP SP3

It's really hard to squeeze a lot of info on a 640x480 desktop!

486gac2_40_25_superpi.jpg

XP on a 83MHz POD with 64 MB of RAM? Goodness that must be bloody slow

yeah thats aweful, although winxp was reported to "run" with as low as pentium-25 and 24mb of ram, probably the initial version without any service pack.
i would rather use nt4 or win95osr2 on 64mb rig. even win2000 would occupy about 60mb of ram after booting, and winxp uses a bit over 100.
and the superpi time is aweful too, probably due to socket3's 32bit bus and lower fsb.

higher fsb and clock doesn't mean faster performance!

noshutdown wrote:

yeah thats aweful, although winxp was reported to "run" with as low as pentium-25 and 24mb of ram, probably the initial version […]
Show full quote

smeezekitty wrote:

lazibayer wrote:

CPU: Pentium Overdrive 83MHz at 40x2.5=100MHz Mobo: FIC 486-GAC-2 RAM: 64MB 60ns FPM OS: XP SP3 […]
Show full quote

CPU: Pentium Overdrive 83MHz at 40x2.5=100MHz
Mobo: FIC 486-GAC-2
RAM: 64MB 60ns FPM
OS: XP SP3

It's really hard to squeeze a lot of info on a 640x480 desktop!

486gac2_40_25_superpi.jpg

XP on a 83MHz POD with 64 MB of RAM? Goodness that must be bloody slow

yeah thats aweful, although winxp was reported to "run" with as low as pentium-25 and 24mb of ram, probably the initial version without any service pack.
i would rather use nt4 or win95osr2 on 64mb rig. even win2000 would occupy about 60mb of ram after booting, and winxp uses a bit over 100.
and the superpi time is aweful too, probably due to socket3's 32bit bus and lower fsb.

I do run 2000 on my 486 with 64 mb of ram and it is quite slow. The boot time is especially bad.
Even though the minimum spec of XP is 64MB, it truly isn't usable at that even with a fast processor

noshutdown wrote:

yeah thats aweful, although winxp was reported to "run" with as low as pentium-25 and 24mb of ram, probably the initial version […]
Show full quote

smeezekitty wrote:

lazibayer wrote:

CPU: Pentium Overdrive 83MHz at 40x2.5=100MHz Mobo: FIC 486-GAC-2 RAM: 64MB 60ns FPM OS: XP SP3 […]
Show full quote

CPU: Pentium Overdrive 83MHz at 40x2.5=100MHz
Mobo: FIC 486-GAC-2
RAM: 64MB 60ns FPM
OS: XP SP3

It's really hard to squeeze a lot of info on a 640x480 desktop!

486gac2_40_25_superpi.jpg

XP on a 83MHz POD with 64 MB of RAM? Goodness that must be bloody slow

yeah thats aweful, although winxp was reported to "run" with as low as pentium-25 and 24mb of ram, probably the initial version without any service pack.
i would rather use nt4 or win95osr2 on 64mb rig. even win2000 would occupy about 60mb of ram after booting, and winxp uses a bit over 100.
and the superpi time is aweful too, probably due to socket3's 32bit bus and lower fsb.

Hell slow... Not trying to use it just wanted to see what old rigs are capable of...
RAM-wise no boot with 20MB RAM on SP3. It boots with 24MB RAM.
The lowest frequency record is 8MHz, achieved by winhistory.de. I am trying to hit 2MHz 😎

noshutdown wrote:

higher fsb and clock doesn't mean faster performance!

pi_k63p550.PNG

That's impressive! What mobo and OS do you use?

lazibayer wrote:

noshutdown wrote:

higher fsb and clock doesn't mean faster performance!

pi_k63p550.PNG

That's impressive! What mobo and OS do you use?

board is mvp3 with 2mb cache, and i use win2000sp4 on the rig.
you can see my other tests here:
my socket7 cpu benchmark results

Still the same platform:

CPU: K6-3+450 ACZ
Mobo: P5A-B
RAM: 256MB PC133 2-2-2
OS: XP SP3

But this time I turned off some services and the fancy interface.
112x5.5:

124x5, no L3:

112x5.5, no L3:

Here is my K6-3+ @ 600. I not sure if I already posted this result in this thread.

The OS is Windows 98 SE, I think I would get a better score in Windows XP.

Skyscraper wrote:

Here is my K6-3+ @ 600. I not sure if I already posted this result in this thread. […]
Show full quote

Here is my K6-3+ @ 600. I not sure if I already posted this result in this thread.

The OS is Windows 98 SE, I think I would get a better score in Windows XP.

I thought 98SE would occupy less systematic resource than 2000 or XP thus applications may run faster under 98SE.

lazibayer wrote:

Skyscraper wrote:

Here is my K6-3+ @ 600. I not sure if I already posted this result in this thread.

The OS is Windows 98 SE, I think I would get a better score in Windows XP.

I thought 98SE would occupy less systematic resource than 2000 or XP thus applications may run faster under 98SE.

I get better scores in almost all benchmarks when using XP compaired to Windows 98 SE.
Im not 100% sure when it comes to socket 7 systems though as I never tried XP with anythng slower than a Pentium III.

CPU: Pentium Overdrive 83MHz at 40x2.5=100MHz
Mobo: FIC 486-GAC-2
L2-cache: 0KB
RAM: 64MB 60ns FPM
OS: XP SP3

Previous test was done right after fresh installation. This time I shut off some services.

lazibayer wrote:

CPU: Pentium Overdrive 83MHz at 40x2.5=100MHz Mobo: FIC 486-GAC-2 RAM: 64MB 60ns FPM OS: XP SP3 […]
Show full quote

CPU: Pentium Overdrive 83MHz at 40x2.5=100MHz
Mobo: FIC 486-GAC-2
RAM: 64MB 60ns FPM
OS: XP SP3

Previous test was done right after fresh installation. This time I shut off some services.

486gac2_40_25_superpi_0.jpg

yeah its a bit faster than last time, but still pretty slow compared to me getting 13:17 with pmmx-133. i would be running nt4 on that rig if i were you.

noshutdown wrote:

lazibayer wrote:

CPU: Pentium Overdrive 83MHz at 40x2.5=100MHz Mobo: FIC 486-GAC-2 RAM: 64MB 60ns FPM OS: XP SP3 […]
Show full quote

CPU: Pentium Overdrive 83MHz at 40x2.5=100MHz
Mobo: FIC 486-GAC-2
RAM: 64MB 60ns FPM
OS: XP SP3

Previous test was done right after fresh installation. This time I shut off some services.

486gac2_40_25_superpi_0.jpg

yeah its a bit faster than last time, but still pretty slow compared to me getting 13:17 with pmmx-133. i would be running nt4 on that rig if i were you.

I didn't mean to start a competition nor setting some kind of record. Sure a PMMX-133 with 64bit RAM interface and PCI system bus will beat an L2-cacheless PODP with 32bit RAM and ISA bus. No need to mention that.
Shamefully I don't have NT4 but I would purchase one if I spotted a good deal on ebay or somewhere else. I put XP on that rig simply for the thrill of running XP on a 486 platform, and NT4 couldn't give me that same amount of joy.

Tillamook 133x3 on SiS530
Can't turn on L2 cache and the poor memory bandwidth of SiS530 may hurt a lot.

lazibayer wrote:

Tillamook 133x3 on SiS530
Can't turn on L2 cache and the poor memory bandwidth of SiS530 may hurt a lot.

mmx_5smm_133x3_noL2_superpi.jpg

true, you should try it with ali5 board and i expect it to achieve under 6 minutes at 100*4.

noshutdown wrote:

lazibayer wrote:

Tillamook 133x3 on SiS530
Can't turn on L2 cache and the poor memory bandwidth of SiS530 may hurt a lot.

mmx_5smm_133x3_noL2_superpi.jpg

true, you should try it with ali5 board and i expect it to achieve under 6 minutes at 100*4.

It won't boot on P5A-B rev. 1.04 and that's the only ALi5 I got 🙁
I am looking for an MVP3 with 2MB cache. They are quite rare and expensive nowadays. I bought one PA-2013 for 15 bucks back in 2002. Never should have ditched it. 😢

The quest to prove that Netburst isnt terrible... just bad... continues.

Skyscraper wrote:

The quest to prove that Netburst isnt terrible... just bad... continues.

Nice speed on that CPU, air cooling?

Kamerat wrote:

Skyscraper wrote:

The quest to prove that Netburst isnt terrible... just bad... continues.

Nice speed on that CPU, air cooling?

Yes with a Thermalright Ultra 120. It runs very cool so I think a cheaper tower cooler could cool it just fine.
This CPU needs more voltage than expected but it scales well.

Pentium Pro 200 @ 233mhz
Intel 440fx
128mb Edo 60ns
Win98se

Screenshot