VOGONS

Common searches


Reply 40 of 74, by kolderman

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie
Anders- wrote on 2021-10-13, 21:10:
One more important point, it was around that time the floppy port disappeared from the mainboards! My amd64x2 (socket 939), came […]
Show full quote
kolderman wrote on 2021-10-13, 19:21:

I remember the Athlonx 64 X2 peaked around the mid-late 2000s, because upgrading meant going from socket-939 (AGP,DDR,IDE,WinXP) to the AM-socket platform (DD2/3, PCIe,SATA,Vista) meaning you needed to upgrade EVERYTHING. It was the last hurrah of 90s era tech and a lot of people wanted to keep that platform running as long as possible, and the Athlonx 64 X2 meant not only could you upgrade to a high clocked CPU, but often it meant upgrading from single to dual core for owners of the earlier single-core Athlon64s, which made a tremendous difference. Was probably the best CPU upgrade in history and no wonder prices went through the roof.

One more important point, it was around that time the floppy port disappeared from the mainboards!
My amd64x2 (socket 939), came with floppy controller, ddr2, sata and pcie+pci 😀

Edit: I realize there's a bit of contradiction there, will have to doublecheck next time I got the case open.
Pretty sure I've seen both "939" printed on the socket as well as buying 4x1G ddr2 back in the day...

There was a lot of weird stuff around this era, like boards with both AGP and PCIe, possibly DDR1/2, but I have mainly seen DDR2/3 on latter gen boards like s775.

Reply 41 of 74, by Hoping

User metadata
Rank Member
Rank
Member
cyclone3d wrote on 2021-10-13, 19:23:

Ehhh, Even the Geforce FX 5950U is CPU limited in 3DMark 2001 with a Core2 X6800 below 3.2-3.3Ghz.

If going for a PCIe setup for XP, the ideal would be whatever the latest you can get XP drivers for as far as the motherboard goes... Probably an LGA-2011 with a Xeon 1680v2 or so along with a couple Geforce GTX Titan X video cards... of course I would be running XP x64 so I could use more RAM as well. The Sound card would be an Audigy 2 ZS or Audigy 4 Pro.

I've never tried to do something like that, for me XP is DX9 only and I'm not intrested in using a DX12 capable card on XP, and also I don't care about 3DMark scores, I only care that the computer can run any DX9 game maxed out at a high resolution like 1600x900 or 1920x1080 but is guess that DX9 cards aren't capable of this. Like I said, I never tried it, because most games released after Win Vista launch that work on XP will also work on Win7 and sometimes they have a DX9 and a DX10 renderer, and is cheaper to asemble a computer for Win 7 because of the driver support and hardware availability.
Of course everybody has it's point of view, it's only my opinion.

Reply 42 of 74, by subhuman@xgtx

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie

It's a crap platform and as much of a bad purchase decision as it was 10 years ago. Any Sandy Bridge/Ivy bridge chip ran full circles around them in about every possible aspect

7fbns0.png

tbh9k2-6.png

Reply 43 of 74, by The Serpent Rider

User metadata
Rank l33t
Rank
l33t
Anders- wrote:

Don't forget the K6 (and K6-2 and -3) provided a lot more bang for the buck than the intel counterparts

Actually no. AMD had it really tough after Celeron Mendocino came out. They had to scrape the bottom of the barrel after that.
Failure of Bulldozer is practically the main reason why Intel was feeding mainstream market 4 cores after 4 cores CPUs with miniscule improvements (with some corner cutting) and still got away with it.

Get up, come on get down with the sickness
Open up your hate, and let it flow into me

Reply 44 of 74, by Anders-

User metadata
Rank Member
Rank
Member
The Serpent Rider wrote on 2021-10-16, 17:22:
Anders- wrote:

Don't forget the K6 (and K6-2 and -3) provided a lot more bang for the buck than the intel counterparts . PentiumII and III were pretty expensive (new motherboards needed, etc.)

Actually no. AMD had it really tough after Celeron Mendocino came out. They had to scrape the bottom of the barrel after that.
Failure of Bulldozer is practically the main reason why Intel was feeding mainstream market 4 cores after 4 cores CPUs with miniscule improvements (with some corner cutting) and still got away with it.

You missed a bit of the quote there, fixed that for you.
Perhaps you can present some prices to show how expensive the k6-2/3 was because that's not what I recall from back in the day.

The 300A was welcome after intels adventure with the l2-missing first gen celeron.
The BP6 with a pair of overclocked 300A's was the dream back then 😁

Bulldozer is way later and not really relevant in this context...

Måttfull och balanserad.

Reply 45 of 74, by The Serpent Rider

User metadata
Rank l33t
Rank
l33t

You missed a bit of the quote there, fixed that for you.

I didn't. You've mentioned PIII which was sold later than Mendocino.

Perhaps you can present some prices to show how expensive the k6-2/3 was because that's not what I recall from back in the day.

Celeron 300A - $150
K6-2 300 - $281

Nuff said.

Get up, come on get down with the sickness
Open up your hate, and let it flow into me

Reply 46 of 74, by Anders-

User metadata
Rank Member
Rank
Member
The Serpent Rider wrote on 2021-10-16, 23:10:
I didn't. You've mentioned PIII which was sold later than Mendocino. […]
Show full quote

You missed a bit of the quote there, fixed that for you.

I didn't. You've mentioned PIII which was sold later than Mendocino.

Perhaps you can present some prices to show how expensive the k6-2/3 was because that's not what I recall from back in the day.

Celeron 300A - $150
K6-2 300 - $281

Nuff said.

I don't see the cost of the new (slot1/socket370) motherboard there (if upgrading a socket-7 system), did it go missing? 😁

Edit: I also strongly doubt the $$$ figures are cpu-world. A quicky search will reveal other prices...

Last edited by Anders- on 2021-10-16, 23:36. Edited 1 time in total.

Måttfull och balanserad.

Reply 47 of 74, by The Serpent Rider

User metadata
Rank l33t
Rank
l33t

I don't see the cost of the new

I don't see the cost of the new shiny SuperSocket7 motherboard with AGP slot and correct voltage support either. And no, bottom feeding on old motherboards wasn't very sustainable business model.

Last edited by The Serpent Rider on 2021-10-16, 23:38. Edited 1 time in total.

Get up, come on get down with the sickness
Open up your hate, and let it flow into me

Reply 48 of 74, by Anders-

User metadata
Rank Member
Rank
Member
The Serpent Rider wrote on 2021-10-16, 23:35:

I don't see the cost of the new

I don't see the cost of the new shiny SuperSocket7 motherboard with AGP slot either.

And don't forget to add in the cost of the new dimm modules too!

Edit: and since you brought up agp, I guess you need a new graphics card as well 😁 😁 😁

Edit 2: my first comment on the price still stands...

Anders- wrote on 2021-10-13, 17:43:
bloodem wrote on 2021-10-13, 17:19:
The Serpent Rider wrote on 2021-10-13, 16:03:

K6 (K6-2)
Who needs efficiency? We can push Mhz and rely on SIMD to fix weak FPU.

Me: "Yeah, so lame..."
Also me: *has a gazillion SS7 full PCs (+ motherboards and CPUs) and still wants more. 🤦

Don't forget the K6 (and K6-2 and -3) provided a lot more bang for the buck than the intel counterparts. PentiumII and III were pretty expensive (new motherboards needed, etc.)

Måttfull och balanserad.

Reply 49 of 74, by Anders-

User metadata
Rank Member
Rank
Member
The Serpent Rider wrote on 2021-10-16, 23:35:

I don't see the cost of the new

I don't see the cost of the new shiny SuperSocket7 motherboard with AGP slot and correct voltage support either. And no, bottom feeding on old motherboards wasn't very sustainable business model.

What you call bottom feeding was the only way amd could get by back then, they absolutely had to sell their cpu's at a lower price in order to compete with intel.

Måttfull och balanserad.

Reply 50 of 74, by Repo Man11

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie

Contemporary real world prices on this sort of thing are surprisingly difficult to find. On this capture of Cybermax's site from Jan. of 2000, AMD has both the cheapest and the most expensive of the offerings in their "Valuemax" line of computers.
I also found August of 1999:

Attachments

Last edited by Repo Man11 on 2021-10-17, 03:23. Edited 2 times in total.

Reply 51 of 74, by cyclone3d

User metadata
Rank l33t++
Rank
l33t++

Before I had a K6-2 system I may have had a K6 for a while.

I don't remember the first K6-2 CPU I had, but when I was running a K6-2 550, I paid around $50 for it. The Intel CPUs were at least 4x that amount. I was getting a discount... something like 15% over cost.

Edit: I was working at a local computer store back then and starting in 2000, it looks like the pages were archived:
https://web.archive.org/web/2000*/swselectronics.com

That should give a pretty good idea of retail prices for a decent amount of stuff back then.

Fun fact... I handled the maintenance / updating of the webpage while I worked there... in 2000-2001.

Yamaha YMF modified setupds and drivers
Yamaha XG resource repository - updated November 27, 2018
Yamaha YMF7x4 Guide
AW744L II - YMF744 - AOpen Cobra Sound Card - Install SB-Link Header

Reply 52 of 74, by Repo Man11

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie

In these reviews from 1997, there's a listing for a K6 from Tiger Direct for $1,999.00. The least expensive Intel system is a Gateway for $2,389.00. https://web.archive.org/web/19970711023328/ht … sales/index.htm

Editor's Choice:

Attachments

Last edited by Repo Man11 on 2021-10-17, 01:51. Edited 1 time in total.

Reply 54 of 74, by ODwilly

User metadata
Rank l33t
Rank
l33t

If you aren't putting a Hyper 212 on a FX chip and OCing the Northbridge frequency you aint doing it right

Main pc: Asus ROG laptop. I7-6700HQ, GTX 960M 4gb, 16gb DDR4.
Retro PC: Soyo P4S Dragon, 3gb ddr 266, 120gb Maxtor, Geforce Fx 5950 Ultra, SB Live! 5.1

Reply 55 of 74, by Repo Man11

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie

Across a span of several years, the low cost/lowest cost systems that Cybermax offered were consistently AMD based.
https://web.archive.org/web/19991110021802/ht … es/valuemax.asp

Attachments

Reply 56 of 74, by bestemor

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie

Heh, now this topic took quite the detour it seems... From FX8350 to a K6 ?! 🤪

So, perhaps even the Phenom should get its share of the action as well ?
I found this little snippet about modern performance etc:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yp2Bf51XkCA

Good thing I only plan on using the platform for mostly older games and WinXP it seems.

Reply 57 of 74, by The Serpent Rider

User metadata
Rank l33t
Rank
l33t

What you call bottom feeding was the only way amd could get by back then, they absolutely had to sell their cpu's at a lower price in order to compete with intel.

No, AMD had some presence in OEM (multiple examples above), which is sustainable business model. But as I've already mentioned, they had to significantly scale down pricing and expectations after Celeron release. With FX release things got really dire, due to very weak presence in OEM and nearly zero presence in servers.

Get up, come on get down with the sickness
Open up your hate, and let it flow into me

Reply 58 of 74, by Hoping

User metadata
Rank Member
Rank
Member
The Serpent Rider wrote on 2021-10-20, 11:53:

No, AMD had some presence in OEM (multiple examples above), which is sustainable business model. But as I've already mentioned, they had to significantly scale down pricing and expectations after Celeron release. With FX release things got really dire, due to very weak presence in OEM and nearly zero presence in servers.

I concur. I have an old workstation with two opteron 2384, and it already was very low end, with the next generation they only got worse. And I think that in ten years I've never seen an HP branded computer with an FX cpu. I mention HP because it's the brand I've seen more around here.
Until the release of Ryzen AMD was in a deep hole. They were cheaper, but the gap was very huge.
Again, I like AMD over Intel, but the truth is the truth.

Reply 59 of 74, by Anders-

User metadata
Rank Member
Rank
Member
The Serpent Rider wrote on 2021-10-20, 11:53:

What you call bottom feeding was the only way amd could get by back then, they absolutely had to sell their cpu's at a lower price in order to compete with intel.

No, AMD had some presence in OEM (multiple examples above), which is sustainable business model. But as I've already mentioned, they had to significantly scale down pricing and expectations after Celeron release. With FX release things got really dire, due to very weak presence in OEM and nearly zero presence in servers.

Please learn to quote properly. It's fine to cut down the original message, but leave the header - otherwise the notification system here on vogons won't work.

And no, it's you who is wrong. Back then (k6-) amd had to keep their prices down. All the amd cpu's we bought at the computershop came at a lower cost than the equivalent counterparts.
It's of course fine to compare prices from computer system ads, but they won't all of the story as the seller pick where to make the profit (and how much of it).

Måttfull och balanserad.