TBerk <bayareaberk@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> On May 18, 12:20 pm, archm...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
(Nate Edel) wrote:
> > Actually, the Celerons of the P2/P3 generation - like the 667mhz one -
were
> > pretty good. There is no AMD K2 that I'm aware of - I assume that
means K6-2
> > (although there were, I think, some AMD Athlon [K7] 500mhz chips as
well.)
> >
> > The K6-2 was a pretty good chip but really more of a Pentium-MMX
generation
> > chip than a P2/P3 generation chip. My bet would be on the Celeron.
>
> Alright, Thanks. And you are right, I forgot the '6' there.
>
> What I found out since then is less the chips and speed and more the
> OS; I put Win2k on the AMD system (w/ 256M RAM) and it sat up and
> barked right past the others, running WinXP.
XP on 256mb of RAM was a bad idea when it ****pped, and it's gotten to be a
totally untenable one with various patches (and especially with IE 7 -
overall, it's better than 6 and IME a little faster if you've got enough
ram, but it's definitely more memory-hungry.)
--
Nate Edel http://www.cubiclehermit.com/
preferred email |
is "nate" at the | "I do have a cause, though. It is obscenity.
posting domain | I'm for it." - prologue to "Smut" by Tom Lehrer
|
