Reply 20 of 39, by appiah4
- Rank
- l33t++
wrote:I agree with both of you appiah4 and swaaye. In terms of performance in that period, the PIII really creams the K6-III on a perf […]
I agree with both of you appiah4 and swaaye.
In terms of performance in that period, the PIII really creams the K6-III on a performance/megahertz basis.
And I cannot deny that the 440BX chipset was a masterpiece. On my K6-III, I regularly reach down for the RESET button, but I fondly recall my PIII-500 running rock solid in DOS and Windows 98.I guess I was hoping to stretch the usefulness of the K6-III beyond late era DOS games.
Well.. It kind of depends on how far you are pushing the Socket 7 and with which chipset I suppose. With (Super) Socket 7 I don't get into AGP at all, barring the use of a Voodoo 3 3000 AGP which seems to be the most reliable AGP card ever I suppose. I'm not that limited for options as I have a ton of PCI 3D cards to pick from ranging from a Voodoo2/SLI to a Radeon 9250. I also tend to stick to the 430TX chipset and I find the system is incredibly reliable. The issue is 64MB cacheable RAM, of course, but that doesn’t seem to be a huge problem as I use my K6-2/2+/3 systems for 1998 and earlier, and 64MB is often adequate for that.
Oftentimes I find myself questioning why I am using a K6-2, I could of course use just a Socket 7 MMX or a 66MHz Bus Pentium II instead. Which is a fair question, to be honest. I don't really know the answer myself. I always find it difficult to choose between a K6-2 vs a Pentium II for a 1997 build, or a Pentium II vs Pentium III for a 1998 build. 1999 and onwards is much easier.
Retronautics: A digital gallery of my retro computers, hardware and projects.