My Pentium 166 MMX gets 14fps in Quake 3, so I would say a touch low, but maybe 3dnow helps the K6-2 a lot?

What FPS 66 or 100?

your performance looks ok. even k6-2 is pretty slow, and the k6's lacking of 3dnow instructions does make some difference.
pure fpu performance: p55c>p54c>>k6>k6-2>>winchip2>winchip
real game performance: k6-2>winchip2>p55c>k6>winchip>p54c

noshutdown wrote:

your performance looks ok. even k6-2 is pretty slow, and the k6's lacking of 3dnow instructions does make some difference.
pure fpu performance: p55c>p54c>>k6>k6-2>>winchip2>winchip
real game performance: k6-2>winchip2>p55c>k6>winchip>p54c

Shouldn't the fpu performance be p55c > p54c > K6-2 >= K6 > Winchip2 > Winchip ?
I mean, the FPU's of K6 and K6-2 are the same really, just that the K6-2 has got 3DNow! extensions. Hence equal unless programs take advantage of those, in which case the K6-2 would get an edge. Also the larger L1 cache should help a bit as well.

mwdmeyer wrote:

My Pentium 166 MMX gets 14fps in Quake 3, so I would say a touch low, but maybe 3dnow helps the K6-2 a lot?

What FPS 66 or 100?

It's running at 66mhz.

noshutdown wrote:

your performance looks ok. even k6-2 is pretty slow, and the k6's lacking of 3dnow instructions does make some difference.
pure fpu performance: p55c>p54c>>k6>k6-2>>winchip2>winchip
real game performance: k6-2>winchip2>p55c>k6>winchip>p54c

The Memory speed looks terrible. Considering I'm using SD Ram, I'm benching lower than the IDT with EDO ram. Does this seem right?

With regards to performance in games, I'm seeing next to no performance gain overclocking the Voodoo 3. I remember getting much better results from my old Intel 233mhz with a Voodoo 3.

I've ordered a K6-2 450 which should be with me this week.

The k6-2 450 will be much faster especially when 3dnow! is supported in the software or benchmark..

A k6-2 will benefit quite much from a 100mhz fsb vs 66mhz fsb.

According to my own benches a k6-2 @ 3x 100 is about equal to a 3x 66mhz mmx cpu in worst case scenario (fpu scores in everest 2.20). in everything else it is much faster.
when 3dnow! is supported in the software it is a LOT faster and compares to pentium II.

3dfx voodoo3 will need a pentium II or III to scale well or a k6-3+ overclocked at around 550mhz or faster otherwise it will be a bottleneck even at 1024x768 resolution.

I tried with a game called breakneck (n.i.c.e 2) wich has an in-game benchmark.

a k6-2 @3x 100 with a voodoo3 did 24fps where a p2 @ 300mhz and a slow 66mhz fsb did a whopping 38fps!!!
@ 450mhz and 100fsb the pentium did 55,5fps where my k6-3+@600mhz did only 43,7fps.......

this is 800x600 resolution and at 1024x768 the k6-3+ is still bottlenecking but only a very slight bit as the voodoo gets to do much more work.

But as you can see a p2 at 3x100 would be about equal to a k6-3+ at 600mhz in this game (which isn`t a 3dnow! supporting game). A k6-2 450 would be much slower so don`t expect it do wonders with a voodoo3 but for you it would still be a nice upgrade.

meljor wrote:

I tried with a game called breakneck (n.i.c.e 2) wich has an in-game benchmark.

a k6-2 @3x 100 with a voodoo3 did 24fps where a p2 @ 300mhz and a slow 66mhz fsb did a whopping 38fps!!!
@ 450mhz and 100fsb the pentium did 55,5fps where my k6-3+@600mhz did only 43,7fps.......

in my quake3 test(which was said to support 3dnow), celeron300a @ 450 scored 9.6fps, while k6-3+ @ 550 scored 6.6fps, thats a whopping 45% difference.
in the same test the k6-2 @ 300 is still faster than p55c @ 300 though.
all tests were run with geforce2ultra so there was no bottleneck.

didn`t use quake3 but 3dnow! seems to work best with voodoo`s?

with my sli setup in the k6-3+ i have a geforce 2Ti wich runs fine but it only becomes fast when used in a much higher clocked pentium 3. Geforces love intel and clockspeed.