Celeron Vs K6-2

[Win_98]

Which do you think is better in term
of price and performance.
compare
a celeron 500 PPGA
to K6-2 550
and K6-2 make munch munch out of Intel
bahahaha!
You also pay less too!
Celeron 500+ MB =200
K6-2 550 + MB =150
Expect to pay 20 dollar more for celeron 533
and still worst then K6-2 550
If I have a million dollar I will
buy at least 100 K6-2 550 mhz
Just goes to show you how much I support
AMD cause I think their better and don't like the way Intel alway jacking up prices
and making silly slot1 and ppga whatever.
Let have a vote who here support AMD
Maybe I'm just poor.
Maybe Intel is just ripping us off left and right.
Most of my friend are poor and Intel does not cater to poor folk do they?

[daveleau]

Well, I must say that I have owned and overclocked the K6-2 400, K6-3 450, Cel 366, P3 500 and 2 Celeron 2's. In comparison, for my use (not trying to start a debate), the Intel CPUs are a better fit. The Athlon is a different story. I also have never owned one. Just for gaming and business apps and overclocking, the Celerons are a much better fit for me. (I am trying to be as PC as possible about this topic since there have been SO many debates about this.) Both are excellent CPUs for different apps. I hold the K6-2 dear to my heart since it was my first full build and my first overclock.
Dave

[neo_otyugh]

i have a k6-2 400 at home and use celeron 400's at work. and have and extra celeron 400 at home waiting for a mobo.

i can't decide which i like better...some things run faster on the machine at home, such as the windows boot up process or most applications...but at work games seem to load and run faster. i guess the biggest difference to me is the amount of cache. 128k on the celeron system and one meg on the k6-2

what i decided to do when the money comes in is to run the celeron, overclock it and use it as my gaming computer, and run the k6-2 with linux as a server, or maybe dual boot to nt4 for application use. might as well match the processors to thjeir best uses.

[jadison]

I use a AMD K6-2 500 @ home, it seems to run
pretty well considering I only use Win98SE,
and once in a while I'll play Quake 2
For Office 2000, it seems to run pretty well.
They're not very good Overclockers though
I plan on getting a Intel based system before
end of the year, I'll do a comparison test then.
My Celeron 500 PPGA in Austin seems to run faster
than the AMD i have at home, same speed, but better
performance.
I'm debating whether or not to get an Athlon
or an Intel Celeron based-system.
Still thinking...
I just can't make up my mind which :|

-jd-