Page 2:How I've Tested
Page 3:The Windows 95 Performance Of The K6
Page 4:The Windows NT Performance Of The K6
Page 5:The DOS Performance Of The K6
Page 6:The mmX Performance Of The K6
Page 7:The Performance Of An Overclocked K6
Page 8:The Compatibility Of The K6
Page 9:Recommended Motherboards For The K6
The Windows NT Performance Of The K6
Under Windows NT, the K6 is still making a good figure, although the distance to its competitors from Intel isn't big at all. The K6 233 is under Windows NT exactly as fast as a Pentium Pro 200, it's much faster than a Pentium MMX 200, but it's considerably slower than an overclocked Pentium Pro 233 and will most likely be slower than the Pentium II at the same clock speed as well.
|WINDOWS NT 4.0||K6 233||K6 200||K6 166||Pentium MMX 200||Pentium Pro 200|
|Business Winstone 97||71||67.6||63.3||64.3||71.2|
|Highend Winstone 97||26.9||24.5||22||24.2||29.2|
|Business Winmark 97||104||93.5||83.6||87.5||104|
|Winbench 97 CPU Mark16||465||414||362||423||360|
|Winbench 97 CPU Mark32||559||513||466||420||554|
You can see again, that the K6 166 is giving the Pentium MMX 200 a very good run for its money. The Pentium Pro 200 can still show his muscles with his internal L2 cache and the faster FPU in the Highend Winstone. However, considering that the K6 has to run with slow 66 MHz clocked L2 cache, it's performing quite well.
Lots of us would have loved to see the K6 performing even better under NT, because that's the old domain of the Pentium Pro and will be the play ground of the upcoming Pentium II, which is at least as fast as a Pentium Pro at the same clock speed. Hence the K6 will not be faster than a Pentium II under Windows NT at the same clock speed, but it will be much cheaper than the Pentium II as well.