> I'd like to upgrade my current K6-2 350 Processor.
> My preferred candidates are the K6-2 450 and the K6-3 400, the latter
> only slightly more expensive than the 6-2.
> The question is, does the improved architecture of the 6-3 outweigh the
> 'missing' 50 MHz?
> I know it all depends on the software you run, but is there a rule of
> thumb, or a website that does a comparison?
> Thanks for any insights.
My boss and I both have 450's, mine is a K6-2, his a 6-3. One of our
salesmen was interested in upgrading his home PC's K6-2 350, as you
are. We downloaded SiSoft Sandra 99 and ran benchmarks with _nothing_
running but explorer and systray, and the difference was not, IMHO,
enough to justify a K6-3. For the money, look into a K6-2 500. Would
give better/equal performance to the K6-3 450, and a lower price.
Besides, the 500 should tide you over until you can afford the Athlon
Just my nickel before taxes...
mail: mvoelker at mensco dot com