First post, by clueless1
- Rank
- l33t
I wanted to see how these CPUs compare in DOS, so I benched them against each other. Sadly, the K6-2 system has only onboard AGP, no slot, so I had to use the Voodoo3 2000 PCI in both systems to keep things even. Here is some info on the K6-2 platform:
motherboard: P5S-VM rev 2.02 (out of an HP Pavilion 6648c)
Socket 7, SiS530 chipset, 3xPCI, 1xISA, onboard SiS AGP graphics
active graphics: Voodoo3 2000 PCI
and the Celeron platform:
motherboard: P2L98-XV rev 1.02 (out of an HP Pavilion 6355)
Slot 1, i440LX chipset, 1xAGP, 2xPCI, 2xISA, onboard ATI Mach64 AGP graphics
active graphics: Voodoo3 2000 PCI
First up: 3dbench.
K6-2 550: 242.1 fps
Celeron : 216.4 fps
Celeron w/Fastvid: 492.3 fps
PCPbench:
K6-2 550: 108.1 fps
Celeron: 87.6 fps
Celeron w/Fastvid: 101.5 fps
Doom:
K6-2 550: 93.7 fps
Celeron: 81.2 fps
Celeron w/Fastvid: 89.6 fps
Quake:
K6-2 550: 68.2 fps
Celeron: 71.5 fps
Celeron w/Fastvid: 79.9 fps
Both are very fast, but it looks like the Celeron is better at floating point (Quake) and once Fastvid is used, they perform very similarly.
Cheers!
The more I learn, the more I realize how much I don't know.
OPL3 FM vs. Roland MT-32 vs. General MIDI DOS Game Comparison
Let's benchmark our systems with cache disabled
DOS PCI Graphics Card Benchmarks