Very Computer

Hi, all.

I'm about to buy a new system (on which I plan to run both Linux and
Win95, dual boot), and I am faced with a tough choice - which processor
to get? I'd like to get some feedback concerning the differences between
the Pentium (with and withou MMX), Cyrix PRxxx+, and the AMD K6.  Are
the differences that significant? Are there any compatibility problems?

Another thing I'm not sure of is which video card to get.  Is it worth
shelling out an extra $100 to get the Matrox Millenium 4mb, or is an S3
or an ET6000 equally good?

Any response would be greatly appreciated.
Thanks :)

-- Vadim Grinshpun

___________________________________________________________________________
| Vadim Grinshpun                       | The Law of the
Letter:            |

fresh |

envelope. |
|_______________________________________|___________________________________|

A Cyrix runs all Linux software just fine.  I've only run into one
problem under Windows 95.  It seems that the AWE64 drivers don't like
the chip, so the card runs almost like an AWE32.  Other than this, I've
heard of no problems.

--

Kertis Henderson

Quote:> Another thing I'm not sure of is which video card to get.  Is it worth

> shelling out an extra $100 to get the Matrox Millenium 4mb, or is an
> S3
> or an ET6000 equally good?

Tim

btw...this is not related, but I read a full page article in  the
business section of the san jose mercury  news a few months ago about
a new chip (from yet another company). supposedly it was faster than
pentium and was compatible, yet was developed seperately from  the
ground up. anyone have more information?
-----

"Cogito ergo sum." -- Descartes ("I think, therefore I am.")

[Posted and mailed]

That said, there are Linux kernel patches and add-on utilities that tell
the 6x86 CPU to kick itself into a low-power mode whenever the HLT
instruction is issued.  This reduces both of the above problems, if
present, to very low levels, assuming fairly low system loads.  The
problem is that if you're running with a flaky motherboard or inadequate
CPU cooling, the system will be fine until you do something CPU-intensive,
like compile a kernel or engage in heavy ray-tracing or some such, at
which point the software will crash or you'll get a system crash.

Finally, and probably most to the point, Cyrix has introduced versions of
their CPUs that run much cooler.  I think they've got "L" suffixes on
their model numbers, and IIRC they're dual-voltage CPUs that will
therefore not work with older motherboards, but they require less in the
way of hand-picking of motherboards and cooling hardware once the basic
voltage requirements are met.

Quote:> btw...this is not related, but I read a full page article in  the
> business section of the san jose mercury  news a few months ago about
> a new chip (from yet another company). supposedly it was faster than
> pentium and was compatible, yet was developed seperately from  the
> ground up. anyone have more information?

--
Rod Smith                                 Author of:

http://php.indiana.edu/~rodsmith          "OS/2 Soundcard Summary"
NOTE: Remove "uceprotect" from address to e-mail me

: Hi, all.

: I'm about to buy a new system (on which I plan to run both Linux and
: Win95, dual boot), and I am faced with a tough choice - which processor
: to get? I'd like to get some feedback concerning the differences between
: the Pentium (with and withou MMX), Cyrix PRxxx+, and the AMD K6.  Are
: the differences that significant? Are there any compatibility problems?

IMHO, MMX is mainly meant to allow better performaance for various kinds
of "Win-hardware". This hardware comes with Windows drivers that do in
software what decent hardware would do using dedicated on-board
processors. This increases the load on the CPU and degrdes overall system
performance. It's true that some voice/image processing applications might
benefit from it (In one lecture I took I heard of a performance gain of
1500% by hand-coding such a program in assemby using MMX instructions),
but no such applications are currently available, even for Windows.
Since curently no Linux drivers are available for this class of
Win-junkware, you should avoid it like the plague.
Of the CPUs that would fit in a Pentium socket the K6 is the fastest.
However, to achieve the full performance gain you need a board that can
run at 75MHz, and there aren't many of these around.

: Another thing I'm not sure of is which video card to get.  Is it worth
: shelling out an extra $100 to get the Matrox Millenium 4mb, or is an S3
: or an ET6000 equally good?

IMO, since most X applications were written with Workstations in mind,
they require high resolutions to be comfortable. You'll also want a
reasonably high color depth - probably High-Color - to avoid trouble with
"color maps". However, for resolutions of 1024x768 you probably need a 17"
monitor, so prepare to shell out at least $750 if you're intersted in this
pleasure. However, note that the default X server (that's the component
managing graphics on your machine) can has a "virtual desktop" feature,
similar to ATI's (on Windows).
The conclusion is you'll probably want a 4MB graphics adapter, if you can
afoord it. However, I don't think you need a Millenium, unless you use 3D
graphics software and similar fancy stuff. I was able to find an ET6000
with 4.5MB MDRAM for just $159 recently (could get one for even less
several weeks later when a large computer store chain went bankrupt ...)
IMHO, it works great under Linux and NT 4.0, but causes trouble with OS/2
4.0. So it might be the thing for you, unless you're considering to add
OS/2 to the mix before version 5.0 (which would hopefully include sensible
ET6000 drivers) is out, which is scheduled for next year. If you do (and I
personally I think that of al PC based OSes OS/2 is the best companion for
Linux - mail me if you want to know why) this may change the
considerations presented above about MMX, since it comes with a voice
recognition component built in, which may be able to take advantage of MMX
in the future.

--
Yours
    Yitzhac Casapu
       Phone/FaxModem: 972-4-8334527
       41/12 Beth-Lehem St. Haifa, Israel; ZIP: 35567
    Studying at the Technion - Israel institute of technology.
       Faculty of Electrical Engineering

When I shop for hardware I always look for the "Designed for Windows 95" logo.
I really thank Microsoft(TM) for encouraging manufacturers to label their
products this way, so I know what to AVOID.

I stick to quality software:

Linux 2.0.30                        | IBM OS/2 Warp (TM) v4.0

Does anyone know of problems related to running the AMD K6
with Linux? The RedHat page states that there have been some
problems related to the machine freezing-up but only during install.
They noted that this is probably due to incompatable motherboards
being used with the K6. Any ideas? Suggestions are greatly appreciated.

--
------------------------------------------------------------

Meetinghouse Data Communications         Portsmouth, NH  USA
------------------------------------------------------------

Couldn't resist to comment some of your opinions,

Quote:> IMHO, MMX is mainly meant to allow better performaance for various
> kinds of "Win-hardware". This hardware comes with Windows drivers
> that do in software what decent hardware would do using dedicated
> on-board processors. This increases the load on the CPU and degrdes
> overall system performance. It's true that some voice/image
> processing applications might benefit from it (In one lecture I
> took I heard of a performance gain of 1500% by hand-coding such a
> program in assemby using MMX instructions), but no such applications
> are currently available, even for Windows.

The MMX itself does not reduce the system performance per se. What
you meant was probably: you could always have a dedicated hardware
extension for the job otherwise done in MMX commands. This is true,
but for most home users, a little speed up in video or audio stuff
would enable them to use fancy software without adding a dedicated
card. And this is, as you can imagine, Intels strategy. Some time
ago I used to play a nice "3D shoot 'em up" demo of the game "ZAR"
on my non-MMX P187.5 (o/c). Then I saw the same thing on my
brothers P200/MMX. By that experience I feeled what would be possible
by proper usage of MMX in multimedia stuff. The bad news, MMX uses
the registers of the FP unit, this reduces its applicability for
3D modelling.

Quote:> Since curently no Linux drivers are available for this class of
> Win-junkware, you should avoid it like the plague.

Quote:> Of the CPUs that would fit in a Pentium socket the K6 is the
> fastest. However, to achieve the full performance gain you need
> a board that can run at 75MHz, and there aren't many of these
> around.

Quote:> IMO, since most X applications were written with Workstations in
[snip]
> can has a "virtual desktop" feature, similar to ATI's (on Windows).
> The conclusion is you'll probably want a 4MB graphics adapter, if you
> can afoord it. However, I don't think you need a Millenium, unless
> you use 3D graphics software and similar fancy stuff.

Quote:> I was able to find an ET6000 with 4.5MB MDRAM for just $159 recently
> (could get one for even less several weeks later when a large
> computer store chain went bankrupt ...) IMHO, it works great under
> Linux and NT 4.0, but causes trouble with OS/2 4.0. So it might be

Quote:> Linux - mail me if you want to know why) this may change the
> considerations presented above about MMX, since it comes with a
> voice recognition component built in, which may be able to take
> advantage of MMX in the future.

Wow... (now the devil has the largest perspectives)

Quote:> When I shop for hardware I always look for the "Designed for
> Windows 95" logo. I really thank Microsoft(TM) for encouraging
> manufacturers to label their products this way, so I know what to
> AVOID.

Quote:> I stick to quality software:
> Linux 2.0.30                        | IBM OS/2 Warp (TM) v4.0

Greetings

Mirco

: Couldn't resist to comment some of your opinions,

: > Linux - mail me if you want to know why) this may change the
: > considerations presented above about MMX, since it comes with a
: > voice recognition component built in, which may be able to take
: > advantage of MMX in the future.
:   ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

: Wow... (now the devil has the largest perspectives)
:  
: > When I shop for hardware I always look for the "Designed for
: > Windows 95" logo. I really thank Microsoft(TM) for encouraging
: > manufacturers to label their products this way, so I know what to
: > AVOID.

: This is funny, didn't know this one

: > I stick to quality software:
: > Linux 2.0.30                        | IBM OS/2 Warp (TM) v4.0

: What in the hell is "IBM OS/2 Warp (TM) v4.0"? Is this something like
: OS/2 Warp 3, which was preinstalled on one of our P90/8MB two
: years ago?
: Hmmm ... ??? :-(

Nahhhhh... It means OS/2 Warp 4.0 (aka Merlin). It's pretty cool, has
built in voice-recognition, and works like a charm. Version 3.0 was ok,
and with a little better marketing on IBM's side it could have beat
Win 95 easily. It is also completely 32-bit (As opposed to said Win95)

--
Bas Vermeulen                     | Running Linux 2.0.30A

                                  |         DOS 6.22 and Windows 3.11

: Greetings

: Mirco

Hi Kertis.

Quote:>> I'm about to buy a new system (on which I plan to run both Linux and
>> Win95, dual boot), and I am faced with a tough choice - which processor
>> to get? I'd like to get some feedback concerning the differences between
>> the Pentium (with and withou MMX), Cyrix PRxxx+, and the AMD K6.  Are
>> the differences that significant? Are there any compatibility problems?
> One thing is definite:  Cyrix chips are MUCH CHEAPER!  A 6x86 (M1) will
> blow a Pentium of the same speed away for most uses.  However its FPU is
> slightly slower.  The 6x86MX (M2) gives a Pentium II a good run for its
> money (from what I've heard).
> A Cyrix runs all Linux software just fine.  I've only run into one
> problem under Windows 95.  It seems that the AWE64 drivers don't like
> the chip, so the card runs almost like an AWE32.  Other than this, I've
> heard of no problems.

Best wishes from Riley,
UK Host for IGA-Net{tm},
The International Genealogy Association Network.

 ... WWW:   http://www.geocities.com/Heartland/Plains/5137

Quote:>I have to admit that I don't like Cyrix processors, and have never had
>one that didn't give me problems under Linux. I'd agree that they're
>much cheaper than Intel processors, but they're virtually the same price
>as AMD processors, and I've never had any problems with the latter,
>hence they're my favourite...

Based on the preponderance of evidence in Usenet discussions, those
cases where people have had problems with Cyrix processors have
generally resulted from hardware problems with memory or motherboard.
Users are not generally able to isolate the problem to the CPU as they
don't have extra CPUs to swap in; similar problems would result with
any other CPU.

The increasing availability of half-decent PCI motherboards using
common designs that don't have to cost a lot (the Gigabyte 586S comes
to mind; they sell for about $100 these days) that are nicely
compatible with any but the "bleeding edge" processors makes most of
this pretty moot.  Buy a half-decent motherboard and decent memory,
and these problems go away.

--

PGP Fingerprint: 10 5A 20 3C 39 5A D3 12  D9 54 26 22 FF 1F E9 16
URL: <http://www.hex.net/~cbbrowne/>
Q: What does the CE in Windows CE stand for?  A: Caveat Emptor...

If you are going to think about getting a Cyrix or AMD or even Intel
system, do
your homework, read up on all your options, if your informed you will
likely have
a lot less headaches when you finally get your system and set it up.

If I have to go to another LAN party and spend 2 hours helping people
get their
dang network cards working I am going to scream!  grrrrr....

Actually I don't mind helping people, it is sort of annoying though.  If
you are
clueless about computers get brand name stuff folks, you will have the
least
troubles, none of these cheap ass $20 network cards, they work fine, but
they
can be troublesome to get working...

Ok maybe the 80-90% mentioned above is a little high, but you get my
point.

--
Jim Zubb

Quote:

> Based on the preponderance of evidence in Usenet discussions, those
> cases where people have had problems with Cyrix processors have
> generally resulted from hardware problems with memory or motherboard.
> Users are not generally able to isolate the problem to the CPU as they
> don't have extra CPUs to swap in; similar problems would result with
> any other CPU.

In the case of Cyrix 6x86 CPUs of about a year ago, these CPUs drew more
current than their Intel Pentium counterparts, and motherboards with
voltage regulators that couldn't handle this didn't work well with them,
hence you'd get lots of interaction effects.  I experienced this
personally.  I gather from discussions at the time that earlier Cyrix CPUs
(the 5x86 and even 486 and earlier) CPUs had similar interaction issues.
I haven't been following the latest 6x86 dual-voltage and MMX CPUs very
closely, so I don't know if this sort of thing is as common with them.  I
do know that similar issues crop up with AMD and even Intel CPUs, though
with the latter, the motherboard manufacturers all scramble to be sure
their latest production is compatible with everything Intel produces.

The bottom line, especially when buying a Cyrix or AMD CPU:  Check for
compatibility of the CPU with the motherboard.  Both Cyrix and AMD
maintain lists of officially tested boards on their web sites.  Make sure
you're getting something that's certified by the CPU manufacturer and/or
the motherboard manufacturer for the specific model AND SPEED of CPU you
intend to use.  This will greatly enhance your chances of getting
something that works well.

As this is a Linux newsgroup, I'll add that I've seen very little in the
way of Linux-specific compatibility gripes lately with respect to
motherboards or CPUs.  It seems that the rise of Win95 and WinNT have made
manufacturers more aware of the needs of 32-bit OSes, and this has
benefitted Linux.  This isn't to say that all motherboards are created
equal, of course; but if something works well in WinNT, say, it's likely
to work well in Linux, as well.  If there are any major exceptions to this
rule for currently-available hardware, I'm sure this message will provoke
a response, so keep your eye on this thread if you want to know about
it.... ;-)

--
Rod Smith                                 Author of:

http://php.indiana.edu/~rodsmith          "OS/2 Soundcard Summary"
NOTE: Remove "uceprotect" from address to e-mail me

    Riley> I have to admit that I don't like Cyrix processors, and
    Riley> have never had one that didn't give me problems under
    Riley> Linux.

I.e. you have never had one at all.  :-)
(Sorry, could not resist).

    Riley> I'd agree that they're much cheaper than Intel processors,
    Riley> but they're virtually the same price as AMD processors, and
    Riley> I've never had any problems with the latter, hence they're
    Riley> my favourite...

For the same generation processor, it seems that Cyrixes in general
perform a bit better than AMD's and especially Intel's.  They _do_
have some heat problems now and then, for instance in their initial
version of the 6x86 (without the 'L' for 'low power') -- as do Intel
(but curiously not AMD).  I have also heard vague rumors that Windows
NT 4.0 runs with the L1 cache disabled under Cyrix processors, but
have verified this to be wrong with the 6x86 P200+.

I have, of course, not had any single problem with the processor - and
following the discussion, it seems that most problems people have
(such as the A20 line someone mentioned on their AMD chip) is luser
error.

-tor