The Need for Speed

[Mosschop]

My current system is a Cyrix PR333 with 8MB bog standard agp card and 128mb 100hz SDRAM.I have enough cash to either go for an AMD K2 400 or a Voodoo 3 2000 - which is going to give me a better speed increase - particularly in FPS / graphically intensive games? Btw, I've already tried a Voodoo 2 card, but my MB doesn't seem to approve.


[This message has been edited by Mosschop (edited 07-07-99).]

[Comtech]

The AMD is twice as fast as your Cyrix, especially with games. Go with the chip.

[Plaster]

Last time I checked, you could get a K6/2 400 and a low end accelerator for the same price as a voodoo3. You could get an old *** Monster3D card for around $40 and the K6/2 400 costs around $60-$70. If what you're looking for is better gaming performance and better graphics, get the Voodoo3. If you're just looking for an overall speed increase, but the same old ugly graphics, get the K6/2 400 by itself.

[AndreBranco]

the k6-2 400 is not that fast. you should go with the celeron 333- 366 or 400. much faster than the k6-2 400!

[Wiruz]

NO! The celeron is NOT Faster than the AMD... NOWAY!

I've got one myself (K6-2 300 oc 350) on a PA-2013 with 2megz of cache and 128 megz PC100.... All that i can say is... it rocks - big time

If you're planning on running games and/or multimedia, then the AMD is the processor of my choice. The P-II is faster, but the celeron is a castrated chip, born dead.

Go with the AMD... and perhaps a VooDoo II, both are cheap and good choices!

[Mosschop]

Looks like it will have to be the K2/400 and upgrade the video card when the Voodoo 3 / TNT 2 drop in price

[Joel Kleppinger]

I agree with Plaster's "buy the K6-2 now and a cheaper 3D video card" idea. However, I have a bit different idea.

With prices like they are, if you bought a K6-2 350 (~$35), you might still have enough for a V3, but definitely something like a Banshee or a TNT which still performas admirably. In fact, the card in this, my main system, is none other than the veritable RivaTNT. Or go with the Voodoo2 as Plaster suggested.

I agree with the people that suggest doing both. Though, if you were going to only buy one of the two items you listed, going for the K6-2 would indeed be the better idea.

[Comtech]

For games the AMD is faster. It runs at a true 100mhz bus, not 66mhz (Celeron). Combined with good PC100 RAM, it will out perform any Celeron rated at the same speed because of the bus speed. Even though the Celeron runs it's cache at full speed, and not half, a 100mhz bus is cached at 50mhz on the AMD, and 66mhz on the Celeron, negligable at best.
Get the AMD, splurge on a good video card (TNTII, TNTIII).

[kec95]

If you really wanna a gaming machine get a P3 450, O/C it to 558 and get either a V3 3000 or a TNT2 Ultra. Now thats Gaming.

Kenny C

[AndreBranco]

amd k6-2 400 faster than the celeron 400!? are you people crazy?? http://www.sysopt.com/forum/smile.gif
the celeron is much faster than the amd k6-"2" but the k6-"3" is another completely different thing. The k6-"2" 400 is in no way faster than the celeron 400, but the k6-"3" 400 is another story. if you want to go with the k6 choose the k6-"3" http://www.sysopt.com/forum/wink.gif

[R.I.P.]

When I didn't have much money I went celeron 300a and overclocked with no problems for 8 months now to 450, my games rock (halflife, mechwarrior 3, unreal) I paired this with 128 pc100 ram and a Monster Fusion. I just ordered a Celeron 366 and plan to overclock it to 550. The specs for these chips at overclocking kickass on all AMD chips. I'm not biased I too am a former AMD overclocker.