Re: about K6 bug

[dg@bingo.baynet.de]

On Tue, 2 Jun 1998, Eugene Sevinian wrote:

> Hi all,

Hi Eugene!

> Recently, there were a lot of post in linux-kernel@vger.rutgers.edu 
> concerning new K6 bug. Tests was done by 'crashme'. Here is excerption
> from Andreas Haumer <andreas@xss.co.at> report.
> 
> [... snipping this report ...]
> 
> Sincerly speaking I have now idea how cricual is this, but as far as
> I consider K6 as a choice for upgrating my PC, I would like to know how
> reliable is this assuming that I have no intention to run this testing
> program very often.  
> 
> Have someone experienced any serious proplem with this cpu?

As far as I can say, there are no problems with the AMD K6 CPUs. I have two
AMDs here at home (one AMD 586-DX/4-120 which is no K6, and a real AMD K6
PR2-200) and several at work, and they don't make problems at all. They are
running both under Linux (at home) and Win95 (at work, sniff...) and the
only disadvantage to the Pentiums is the slower FPU. A Pentium 166 runs
POVray faster than a K6-200. But when you are not doing much arithmetics,
the K6 is the CPU of choice, because it has a very good price/speed/quality
relation. 

But you should think about the board, in which your K6 should work. You
should search for an Intel HX chipset or another chipset which supports
more than 64 MB cacheable area. But be aware, not every old board supports
the K6. 

Bye

Daniel

--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Daniel Gross                                     eMail: dg@bingo.baynet.de
Hollarstrasse 2                                         dgross@gmx.net
D-85053 Ingolstadt, Germany
--------------------------------------------------------------------------

"Gee, Toto, I don't think we are in Kansas anymore."


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org