Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

New Monster CPU Comparison... Where's the P-Pro?

Last response: in CPUs
Share
February 17, 2003 8:50:47 PM

I love reading anything and everything about CPU's I can get my hands on. Technical Documents, Specs, Benchmarks, White Sheets, the list goes on and on. Heck I have the entire intel collection 4004 - Pentium III hanging on my bedroom wall in a custom built plaque, as well as every amd from their 9080 to K7 Athlon CPU's. For some stupid reason I have an infatuation with the Pentium Pro CPU. I dont even know why myself, it is just cool to me. I went out and bought a Compaq 850R server so I could put Dual Pentium Pro's in it and have a Pentium Pro workstation. I was hoping for some Pentium Pro specs and benchmark results on this last article. What happened?

Still Great work though guys.

When the goin gets tough.... Add some more RAM.
February 17, 2003 9:09:38 PM

I used to feel that way about the Cyrix chips, and I noticed that they were missing as well.

I think they skipped the p-pro mostly because it never sold very well and mostly sold just to servers.

Still, Cyrix chips used to sell pretty well, especiallly their 686 processor.

Next we're going to hear from someone who wanted the Transmedia chips in there was well, and maybe even the short-lived VIA CPU.


--------------
Knowan likes you. Knowan is your friend. Knowan thinks you're great.
February 17, 2003 9:26:48 PM

I remember when i was getting my first "paid for by myself computer" that i had the choice of getting the pentium pro or just a pentium.

I was advised not to as general performance was alot worse, and the cpu was only really good for certian packages.

I guess the cpu never sold well and was quickly scrapped/ converted into the pentium2.

I think this review is cool though!
imagine having a p100 with a ti4600 and 512mb ram. wheeeeeeeeeeeeeee

<b>Anyone claiming they can see the difference
between 450 and 500 FPS in Quake3 deserves to
be severely beaten with a rock. :smile: </b>
Related resources
February 17, 2003 9:29:00 PM

They didn't have a xeon either. I never knew the K-62(+) was codenamed Chompers. The early AMD codenames had an awesome flavor to them.

Dichromatic for your viewing plesure...
a b à CPUs
February 18, 2003 12:17:39 AM

I could build a P100/Ti4600 system. Bet?

<font color=blue>Watts mean squat if you don't have quality!</font color=blue>
February 18, 2003 12:45:37 AM

i know you can build it... :smile:
I bet you to use it for a month as your primary system LOL.

<b>Anyone claiming they can see the difference
between 450 and 500 FPS in Quake3 deserves to
be severely beaten with a rock. :smile: </b>
February 18, 2003 1:08:35 AM

What about Macs?

<font color=red>
<A HREF="http://kevan.org/brain.cgi?dhlucke" target="_new">If you were to have sex with your clone would that be considered incest or masturbation?</A></font color=red>
February 18, 2003 1:36:51 AM

Aside from your answered question, I would like to add my criticism on the article, which is nothing short of positive.
I believe this is what makes THG stand out of the other websites. To haul out the whole CPU drawer's 9 year history and benchmark 12.5 straight days non-stop, must be quite exhausting!
It is also a great upgrade guide IMO, shows you what an R9700PRO does on old systems and how high the upgrade can yeild, to better CPUs.
Unfortunatly that is where it falls short, only ONE recent game benchmark. Very disappointing, as I wanted to see how my XP1600+ with an R300 will fare in many DX8 games. (why doesn't Unreal 2 have such benchmarking? Or does it?)

Anyways, great work guys, few flaws (like stating Tbred B had 8 layers instead of 7, when it has 9 instead of 8, last I checked), though the effort truly stands out. Kudos, something Bert and Frank did not get lately much! :smile:

--
This post is brought to you by Eden, on a Via Eden, in the garden of Eden. :smile:
a b à CPUs
February 18, 2003 2:44:27 AM

I've built some whacky stuff before, like a PII 300@2x150, to get the highest PII 300 scores ever seen by man.

<font color=blue>Watts mean squat if you don't have quality!</font color=blue>
February 18, 2003 2:47:14 AM

sweet 150fsb!

how about extreemly highly overclocked 486DX using a peltier or phase change cooling?

<b>Anyone claiming they can see the difference
between 450 and 500 FPS in Quake3 deserves to
be severely beaten with a rock. :smile: </b>
February 18, 2003 3:18:23 AM

I generally don't rant, I just say it's good or bad, but here's why I don't like this comparison.

I want to buy either a 9700 Pro or a 9500 Pro for my T-bird 1000. This review told me practically nothing.

The only thing that I figured out was that my 3dmark score would double and that if I bought a XP 1700+ Tbred it would tripple. Unfortionately that's not really true either since I have half a gig of DDR memory and might be doing a bit better than the Tbird 1000 platform that was used.

What does that actually say to me? Pretty much nothing.

What we really need is something where they test each CPU with DIFFERENT videocards so that you can see where the cutoff is for performance.

I want to know which videocard will yeild practically no more performance for each CPU.

I also like the review over at ace's where they point out which games are CPU intensive, GPU intensive, or both. For example, in the case of Neverwinter Nights a 9700 Pro is pretty much GPU dependent only.

We need a review like this with all the CPU's, many GPU's, and several different games.


<font color=red>
<A HREF="http://kevan.org/brain.cgi?dhlucke" target="_new">If you were to have sex with your clone would that be considered incest or masturbation?</A></font color=red>
February 18, 2003 3:23:25 AM

I know I saw a review somewhere, but not with the new videocards, where they graphed the performance of several videocards with CPU's from something like 1200Mhz to 2500Mhz so that you could see where the performance would flatten out and a better CPU would not increase performance.

<font color=red>
<A HREF="http://kevan.org/brain.cgi?dhlucke" target="_new">If you were to have sex with your clone would that be considered incest or masturbation?</A></font color=red>
a b à CPUs
February 18, 2003 3:46:49 AM

I had one of those rare 486 boards that allowed both 4X mulitpliers (for the DX4100) and 50MHz bus speed (for the DX50, faster than the DX2-50). I set it at 4x50 for 200MHz using a 3.3v AMD DX2-50 at 5v, and a Socket A cooler. It lasted for all of about 20 minutes and wasn't stable.

<font color=blue>Watts mean squat if you don't have quality!</font color=blue>
February 18, 2003 10:31:23 AM

I agree with you, in terms of wanting to know the gaming aspect.
I didn't like Ace's too much, though, because they kept calling a Geforce 2 Ti, Ti200, which is entirely false. I was mislead the entire time thinking they made a typo writing 2 instead of 3. I really wanted to see how my GF3 Ti200 fared on the 1.4GHZ Tbird.

And all it indicated, was that I can't know what to upgrade anymore, as games are all so varied, so poorly coded, save for games like Neverwinter Nights, who still give you the benefit of upgrading cheaply to a better video card, than changing motherboard and CPU.
We're still in a world of monkey programmers.

--
This post is brought to you by Eden, on a Via Eden, in the garden of Eden. :smile:
!