Cyrix 300 weakness

[Idzwan]

What is cyrix 300 weakness

[WhoKnowsWho]

Weak FPU, don't plan on playing 3D games with it 'cause it lags far behind Intel's and even AMD's FPU (Floating Point Unit)
Unlikely to be overclocked.
About %20 slower in business apps than an AMD 300 chip, and over %30 slower than an AMD chip in 3D.
And also, it is essentially a 233 processor, but with the "performance rating" of a 300. If you are upgrading, you would be better off getting an AMD processor, and if you are willing to spend a bit more, a celeron 300a would be good.

[jokostel]

right on!!...hehe
VIVA AMD!
im really not an intel fan...
celerons look good too....
but im goin for a k6-3

[cobain1crt]

I like intel just because you know it is gona work, and that you can overclock, but I must say this...CYREX SUXXXXX!!!!!!!! They are slow, poorly made heaters that are pre-over overclocked and melting, they suck!

[MickMitani]

Cyrix uses a more advanced cpu design than the Intel Pentium. In fact it is more like a Pentium 1.5 and if Cyrix had marketed it that way, they may have avoided making so many enemies. They should never compare their chip to a Pentium II. Their PR rating came from the fact that at any given clock speed, the Cyrix cpu would do more than an Intel Pentium. However, to the average joe on the street, 100mhz is 100mhz. They would just get glassy-eyed if you tried to explain mips or an advanced instruction pipeline to them. So Cyrix came up with the Performance Rating (PR) in order to sell their chips. Like I said, this both helped and hurt Cyrix. That is because when people ran benchmark tests, of course the true mhz rating would be reported, and people would feel like they had been ripped off. Never mind that their performance was higher, the benchmark said x when the chip said y. It is really like comparing a 2000cc gas engine and a 2000cc diesel. Of course they have different performance results, there are other tradeoffs such as the cost of operation and initial cost. Still, if Cyrix could have ever come up with a decent FPU for their chips, they could be a major player in the CPU wars. Rumor is that their Slot 1 cpu will have dual FPUs and much better performance. Anyway, the MII series chips run hot and don't overclock well, but what do you expect from a chip that costs under $50? If you don't expect a lot out of them, you'll be satisfied. They are reliable chips, made in IBM's cpu factories until Cyrix's new owners move production to their plants. I've had only one problem with a Cyrix cpu, a 6x86-166L, and they replaced it free.

[MickMitani]

Oh yeah, and before I forget - would I buy a MII 300? No - it isn't cheap enough compared to the AMD K6-300 or K6-2 300, and they do indeed have better performance. Besides, the motherboard is going to cost the same either way if the one you have now doesn't support the MII or K6-2. If I was going to buy a CPU/MB right now and cost was important, I would buy a Celeron/BX combo, even though I would have to buy a new ATX case or put up with less choice on the MB.

[GIMOER]

Actually it is cheap enough I put a system together in Jan for a friend and at the time no AMD was less than $89 over 233 and the Cyrix 333 was $47.And it now runs 290 83x3.5
on generic Mboard with reg. cpu fan.So while Cyrix is not a Pentium II killer to be sure for less than $50 it's hard to beat.