Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Hardware

VIA Samuel 2 Processor Preview 65

Posted by timothy from the when-good-enough-is-adequate dept.
nofx_3 writes: "Viahardware has a preview up of VIA Cyrix's Samuel 2 core processor. The Samuel 2 is the first .15Micron x86 processor, and has a die size below 50mm2. 3D performance is still lacking, but 2D performance is every bit the Celeron's equal. Also, it requires no active cooling. Sounds like a great Linux Webpad CPU." Remember when AMD was an also-ran instead of the (arguable) price/performance leader? Nice to hear about the smaller players, especially when they're making inexpensive integrated hardware my mom would like to use.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

VIA Samuel 2 Processor Preview More

VIA Samuel 2 Processor Preview

Comments Filter:
  • This isnt for your run of the mill quake 3 desktop machines, this is for smaller things like Palms and Web Pads, they need to be small and use a small amount of energy, and cheat nonetheless, so leaving out a heat sync and fan would cheapen it, make it smaller, and make it consume less energy than a normal processor, therefore that is a HIGHLY logical use for it

    I think that Cyrix processors are junk, but maybe they have struck gold in this thing, we will have to wait and see
  • Comment removed based on user account deletion
  • http://csep10.phys.utk.edu/astr162/lect/light/spec trum.html

    As you can see by the chart, using InfraRed in stead of visible light would actually make it more difficult to make smaller paths.

    UltraViolet or X-Ray on the other hand...
  • Or better: how Deus Ex, Unreal Tournament, Ultima Ascension, Red Alert 2, and Diablo 2 run.
  • It's Athlon.

    Not Ahalon, Atalon, or Athalon :)

    (not a flame, just wanted the poster to read this)
  • One important thing that most people have forgotten with the new CYrix's, you cant just pop them into any motherboard made for a P3 or celeron.
    Well, technially you could, but one thing that has to be present in a motherboard for it to start up, is the processor's microcode in the BIOS.
    that is why new BIOS revisions are always coming out saying "now supports this speed celeron or P3" or whatnot. Its not because the motherboard was previously incapable of handling it, but there was no micorocode instructions stored in the BIOS for that revision of the CPU.
    Which is exactly why some motherboards needed new BIOS revisions to suport the P3 when it came out, or the CuMines..
    they were mainly the same chip, but with diferent microcode, so it needed those instructions before it could properly POST.
  • Actually, I had to go to college before I got stoned, but that whole torched and quartered thing is foreign to me... :-)
    Also, my company hasn't seen too much downward pressure outside of the telco vertical, and they'll be baaack....
  • One detail I meant to add, With a new BIOS revision, most motherboards should work perfectly with this chip, just not out of the box, not for a while..
    which will definately make it even less atractive for the do-it-yourselfer then it already is, but it should still be a cheap, atractive option for low-powered notebooks and subnotebooks, and the appliance market.

  • Confused Positioning (Score:5)

    by Stickerboy ( 61554 ) on Tuesday December 26, 2000 @07:53PM (#540139) Homepage

    I think VIA is confused about where it wants to position the new Cyrix chip in the marketplace - heck, I think it's aiming for the wrong marketplace.

    Cyrix processors of years past, along with the AMD processors before the K6, have proven that there is no place financially in the desktop market for a CPU line that performs subpar, and whose primary consumer incentive is that it's cheaper. It simply is too easy for the other competitors (Intel, and now AMD) to cut prices on their lower-tier CPUs (the ones that aren't the primary money makers anyway) and just squeeze the newcomer out of the marketplace.

    Instead, if VIA is truly aiming at the "computing appliance" market, its competition is the Intel ARM processors, and the Motorola handheld processors as well. They should maybe think about paring down the integrated functions on the processor (as computing appliances probably don't need them anyways) to make the new Cyrix chips even cheaper and less power-hungry to make them both price AND performance competitive with the StrongARMs. They should also stop making comparisons to normal desktop CPUs, because they have a mountain of consumer recognition and recall to climb with the Intel and AMD brands, and they underperform them to boot. Just ask AMD how hard it was to break into the desktop market.

    My 2 cents on why VIA's headed in the wrong direction.
  • It's the one where they talk about the new magnesium 'getters' in the tube's envelope. And the new Octal tube socket.
  • Cyrix vs StrongARM is an uneven battle, because the Cyrix chips are x86-based while the StrongARM are not. This means there is a huge wealth of compatible chipsets and software available for the Cyrix, allowing for a shortened design timeframe and in the end a more robust, tried-and-tested gamut of peripherals and supporting hardware. Just like the Motorola's immortal 680x0 line of cpu's that powered everything from high-end graphic calculators to macs to gaming consoles to automated home thermostats. More and more embedded devices are x86 based, featuring many borrowed items from traditional desktop PCs. Just take a peek at all those iopener/tivo hacking sites. It's all x86-familiar hardware that's easily upgradable and replaceable, often using those Cyrix M2 cpus (which suck but get the job done). This upcoming VIA cpu is no exception.
  • So, what does via have write now?

    1. Chipsets(like always)
    2. A Graphics Division
    3. A CPU

    With this CPU's small die size, I think their is a good chance that via could create a "computer on a chip"... Don't laugh. People have talked about it before. And why not? It would be one of the ultimate solutions for laptops.

    A low power chip that provided the cpu, graphics card, and chipset. Such a feat would be impressive, although not unheard of, (I recall reading a patent from years back on this...) Especially for the laptop/low power market. Apple dues something similar in their laptops with the Unified IC(can't remember the real name write now, but its a truly immpressive chip(not on quite the level of integration mentioned above, but close)

    I could even see some $200 IPAQ type machines, or perhaps more expensive computers, based of off something like this.

    More likely is board-type product than this, but I bet that there could be some "VIA Powered" laptops coming sometime in the future, if VIA plays their cards right.

  • Except notice that the TiVo uses a PowerPC processor. The motherboard and attached chips are clearly a one-off design for TiVo and not a leverage of existing hardware.

    Clearly, TiVo is leveraging the linux OS. Same argument, but different component.
  • the silly-ron's been superceded by the duron in terms of price and performance. thanks to the sis730, the duron'll have affordible motherboards soon. also, the celeron's due for a faster bus soon ... how will the samuel stand next to the 100mhz fsb celly ?
  • Why is this worth discussing?
    A) It's an x86 chip. I'd bet that a full 90+% of /. users run x86.
    B) It's cheap. I'd bet a full 90+5 of /. users like cheap.
    C) It doesn't need active cooling. A full 90+% of /. users think that excessive cooling requirements are a deal breaker for a CPU (god knows why ;)
    D) Its runs Linux.

    'nuff said.
  • A) 3D performance == fp performance for all practical considerations.
    B) Why the hell cares about 2D performance? That's more of a graphics card issue than anything else! As for MMX, it's essentially a 2D-only instruction set. Nobody uses integer 3D engines anymore.
  • Your mobo/CPU combo costs $100. For $150 (including S/H) you can get a 700MHz Thunderbird Athlon +mobo from PriceWatch. That $50 difference really is just noise, and the performance gain by going to an Athlon is staggering.
  • Answer: It doesn't. Unless the new processor is priced substantially lower than Intel or AMD processors, it will fail. Above the 1.1GHZ Ahalon, no greater amount of 2d or 3d speed really matters - for now. So unless the product offers an advantage other than preformance over the 1.1 GHZ Atalon or 1.0 GHZ Pentium III, it will fail. Another important factor is that no one reckognises the Cyrix brand - they haven't made any widely-used CPU's in years. AMD is the "budget alternative", and Intel is the "fastest preformance". So where is Cyrix? Nowhere.

    I don't care if the new chip outpreforms an Athalon 1.1GHZ 2:1. If it's not cheap enough and Cyrix can't shake the "no-name" reputation, the chip will end up like all of their other processors - forgotton.

    This comment is meaningless. Any meaning is purly an act of coincidence.
  • Comment removed based on user account deletion

  • Re:this is a bit much (Score:1)

    by Anonymous Coward
    my mom runs windows on a 486 50, had that thing for 12 years now, it just won't stop.
  • Low power, low heat, low cost... decent performance... sounds like a good cpu for laptops. I wouldn't mind having a laptop with one of these in it...
  • torching is when you burn hash and use an inhaler;
    quartering is when 75% of your coke is actually baking powder...
    cruzified = being ripped off and everyone knows it...

    just kidding, but i liked your path of thought being triggered by the keywords 'stoned' and 'college'
  • They are no longer using visible wavelengths to etch the silicon. But they're not using infrared, but ultraviolet (or higher frequency). It's all about the wavelength.

    What year was that PopSci magazine published? sounds pretty outdated to me.

  • Re:Yeah,but where are the real-world benchmarks ? (Score:3)

    by dbarclay10 ( 70443 ) on Tuesday December 26, 2000 @08:00PM (#540154)
    Or better: how Deus Ex, Unreal Tournament, Ultima Ascension, Red Alert 2, and Diablo 2 run.

    If you can't afford any better a processor than a $50-60 Cyrix, then you're probably not going to be able to afford spending much on other system components. Like a reasonably fast hard drive. Or more than 32M of RAM. Or any non-integrated graphics subprocessor.

    So, for the audience this is targetted at(low-cost/power computer purchasers), it makes almost no sense to spend any time or transistors on a good FPU. All those games/benchmarks you mentioned are FPU-intensive. Now, the Cyrix will get its ass kicked in them. But if you can't tell the difference between a $60 Cyrix and a $200 PIII in the applications this chip was designed for(and, more importantly, bought for), what the hell does it matter how well it runs Unreal Tournament? :)

    Thanks :) Needed a good rant today.

    Dave

    Barclay family motto:
    Aut agere aut mori.
    (Either action or death.)

  • What's the big deal? (Score:3)

    by taniwha ( 70410 ) on Tuesday December 26, 2000 @09:15PM (#540155) Homepage Journal
    Reading this it seems it's just a shrink to 0.15 plus a 64k L2 and a speedup from 667 to 700MHz. Same core and pipe as far as I can tell. Die size is presumably smaller (and thus yield will hopefully be higher) and cheaper.

    But think about low end computer costs (VERY rough numbers - just to give you an idea of relative costs - remember BOM numbers at least double by the time they reach the customer):

    • $60 motherboard etc
    • $20 case/power supply
    • $40 memory
    • $40 disk
    • $40 CPU
    • $10 kbd/mouse
    • $70 monitor
    • $20 CD drive
    The CPU's only about 13% of the total cost - a cheaper CPU doesn't buy you much in the low end CPU marketplace - but a faster one does - it's hard to compete here.

    More integration (cpu/north&south bridges/graphics together) is probably the way to go if you want to win the low price point in this market - esp for someone like VIA who already owns all the IP to do it (Cyrix CPU - VIA core logic - S3 graphics)

    More likely the web-pad market (if it ever exists) is the plave to go with this

  • use it as a cigarette lighter, like the old cyrix chips
    "Me Ted"
  • It simply is too easy for the other competitors (Intel, and now AMD) to cut prices on their lower-tier CPUs

    Heck, that's exactly the point! Let VIA be the sacrificial lamb to bring down the prices of CPU that I'd actually buy! In trying to squeeze out the new competition, the INTELs and AMDs are actually doing the consumer a great service... PRICE WARZ!

  • And you, my friend, have obviously never had to fix computers based on the damn Cyrix processors. Sure, it's owned by a new company, sure they probably have some new engineers on it. But when your overarching goal is still cheap cheap cheap you still get a piece-o-shit processor.

    I agree that Via has some nice products: AMD wouldn't be competitive without VIA chipsets. But I have to agree with the parent post: Cyrix processors were terrible as far as quality goes (at least once they reached the MediaGX line and beyond), and I see no reason for a change just because they are being made by a different company. Like I said, the emphasis is still cheap cheap cheap.

    The reason Celerons and Durons are nice reliable processors is because they are basically the same technology as their big brothers, the PIII's and Athlons. Intel and AMD in effect subsidize their low-end chips with revenues and technologies from their high-end chips.

    On a personal note, I don't think it is possible for any company to sustain a level of quality while aiming exclusively for the low end. E.g. Yugo cars, e-machines, et al. The low end has to be used to increase market share, which drives purchases at the high-end, which are what really funds companies. I still don't see any high-end processors coming out under the Cyrix name. I fully expect the new Cyrix processors to be the same pieces of crap the old Cyrix processors were (but hey, I'm willing to be pleasantly surprised).

  • Looks to me like the positioning against Celeron and Duron for this chip is a bit off since Duron will destroy it in performance and Celeron will go to a 100MHz bus soon.

    Given the low power consumption, no fan required, small size this looks like direct competition for Transmeta's Crusoe more than anything. The compatibility with Intel's chipsets and mobo's is a big plus. But, VIA probably should market the chip for budget/small notebooks and webpads.

    I'd like to see AnandTech or Sharkyextreme reveiw this chip. I still run a Cyrix MII-300.
  • Ok... WTF does 2D and 3D performance in a processor mean? If it means integer versus fp, why don't you SAY int and fp?
  • Slightly off-topic, but.. AMD's K7 processor is called the Athlon. A-T-H-L-O-N. Not Athalon, or Athelon, or Ahalon. It's ATHLON. Damn, people, get it straight.
  • Is that this uses the exact same socket as a celeron. Even though the duron is cheaper than the celeron, OEM's continue to use the celeron because of it's cheap boards with integrated video and sound. Now here is a processor that is hopefully going to be even cheaper than the duron, with speed close to that of the celeron. Adding in the fact that OEM's don't need to pay the cost of a fan, and I think intel might be in some trouble.
  • One of the cons listed at the end of the review is competition with the AMD Duron. It's a given that the Duron has better performance than the Samuel II at a given clock speed, and now Duron even has the new SiS chipset for the cheaper value market.

    So will this chip really compete in the value desktop market? I'm thinking that it'll maybe be better applied towards the mobile appliances market, and instead compete with the likes of Transmeta?

  • Comment removed based on user account deletion
  • You haven't read the article. One of the features of the Cyrix CPU is low power usage -- so it would make a bad heat source for a toaster. A Pentium IV, on the other hand...

    Sun actually demoed Jini-aware toaster. Don't know what CPU they had in there.
  • If I can replace my routing box with something that's completely fanless(even w/o a harddrive)

    Like the other reply says, you could just get a Linksys router. The other option would be to take your router box and use a LRP [linuxrouter.org] disk to boot from. LRP boots from that disk (1 or 2 3.5" floppies), works well on a 486 with at least 12MB RAM. With a slower 486 (33MHz or less) or a large heatsink, you could likely get away without a CPU fan and you certainly wouldn't need the hard drive. As long as you don't use too much power, you could probably even remove the fan from your PSU.

    I've got a p100 in my room in which I recently installed a 45GB IBM DeskStar to replace the older drives(2.1G, 1.2G, 850MB). The CPU fan actually makes the worst noise pollution since it's so low (it resonates through the case and floor, which just work to amplify it). I'm also considering installing a LRP disk in it to be rid of the 250MB boot drive which is rather flakey.

    Anyway, just another suggestion.

  • I had a cyrix 166mhz before, and it sucked ass. Cyrix chips in general all sucked really bad, it's not just that they didn't have a famous name, it was sometimes mentioned, just infamously.
  • Odd, I think VIA has some nice products, especially chipsets.

    Or didn't you read the article?

    With this aim in mind, VIA acquired processor manufacturer Cyrix in June of 1999. Shortly after, in August of 1999, VIA snapped up Centaur, design house behind the IDT Winchip processor

    Now I'm guessing that the Cyrix CPU team hasn't been integrated with the rest of VIA, but I'm sure information has flowed between the chipset team and the CPU team. Understanding the chipset could make a better processor.

    The processor does have a small size, takes less energy to run, and doesn't need a fan, which would help reduce computer noise. Looking at it, I'm guessing its also fairly overclockable. In the article that you seem to have neglected to read, there are benchmarks that demonstrate that a Samuel II's speed is almost identical to a Celery's under most circumstances (excluding 3-D intensive games). It seems to be a very solid cpu for those who aren't into gaming, I would almost be tempted to buy it if I was looking at a low-end machine.

    The moral of this story is to read the article next time, then post.

    Just my $.02
  • You're forgetting what P2-233 can do.. My dad's running W95 with Word 97 on a P133 without any difficulties. Office 2000 would have no problems on a 233..
  • i'd imagine that star office on a 486 is one of the most unpleasant computing experiences one could ever suffer... Aside from opening a 96 megabyte TIFF on a Macintosh II with 8 megs of RAM... Seriously. Have you tried running Star Office? I have, on my Athlon 700 with 128MB, and just loading it takes a good 10 or 15 seconds.
  • I run Office 2000 (not for any really heavy tasks) on my 486DX-2 50 laptop. It's a Toshiba 2105 with 28 megs of RAM. Word and Excel run fine (under Windows 95), but I wouldn't recommend Powerpoint.

    The machine also dual boots Slackware. Used to run NetBSD on it also.

  • yes i use star office all the time -- even wrote and am editing a novel on it :)
  • I've had a Cyrix-166 in a production server for nearly 4 years now without one problem. It started on Slackware 3 and is now up to Slackware 7. It's done absolutely everything that I've needed it for, and it was cheap.
  • Yet another x86 clone? Why is this worth even discussing? Especially on /. where most of the readers are running an architecture independant OS anyway? Come on people, do something interesting!
  • Considering Intel did not release a 50 MHz part until June, 1991, your pre-release engineering sample must be worth quite a bit.

    In fact, 12 years ago, Intel was introducing the 80386SX-16.

    Let me know if your time machine is for sale.
  • Nice to hear about the smaller players, especially when they're making inexpensive integrated hardware my mom would like to use.

    VIA a small player??? They make chipsets for a good 50% of motherboards (all the AMD ones and quite a few Pentium ones too), they make their own motherboards under the name of FIC, and they make memory too. VIA are anything but small, they're bigger than AMD in terms of capitol if not in terms of profile...

    --
  • You contradict to yourself.

    If you are right that IT spending is falling fast than Duron, Cyrix and the low end transmeta are going to be looked at. For purely financial reasons. Some companies have finally started cownting and considering does it really worth for the department secretary to use a 1GHz PIII.

    And know what - I am happy to see that.
  • especially when they're making inexpensive integrated hardware my mom would like to use.

    Niether your mom nor my mom nor anyone's mom would use or need a

    .15Micron x86 processor, and has a die size below 50mm2

    This is overdoing it a bit (ok a LOT) much. All most moms or anyone really needs is a 486-- maybe as much as a P-233. Unless you are trying to map the human genome or creating CGI special effects for the next Star Wares, this is way more than you need.

  • or, if you are running any recent word processor or Microsoft operating system, you will not be able to survive on a 486 or P2-233.
  • okay, so we got the P4, the next AMD and Crusoe [which seems to be a flop].
    All new, all advanced.

    Now we got a no-name come up with a chip that possibly is as good as a Celeron. Possibly.

    And that thing is released as the press is talking the stock-market into a continued down-slide and the economy into a crash landing.

    Two main issues:
    Firstly, if the public continues to follow whatever tabloids write in their investment decissions rather than analyzing fundamentals, then this chip will be a no-go, because IT spending is falling fast and so are IT related investments.
    Secondly, if the chip is only as good as a Celeron [which remains to be proven], then a low price will not be enough to ensure it's success.
    Intel is likely to drop it's prices for Celerons if it feels threatenedd. As the Intel already has recouped the development costs for the Celeron many times over, they can afford to flood the market and push the new player in a corner.

    Had the new chip been released 10 months ago, it would have been a winner. But as the economic downturn looms, they should have waited until panic spreads and released it then as a cheaper alternative.

    Releasing it now is strategic idiocy because it's too late for the public market [which will start the next shopping spree in about three months] and to early for the commercial market [which is unlikely to change their budget planning for the next year in order to save $100 on a chip]

    Whoever is advising the 'New Kid on the Board' in marketing and sales should be cruzified, stoned, quartered, torched and then sent to college...
  • If this thing needs no fan to run at normal speed,
    just think what the OverClockers will do to it ;-)
    I mean, I bet you could jack on up there with the .15 micron design.

    BTW, I read something in a PopSci about that they are going to start using InfraRed instead of Visible wavelengths of light t create the paths in the chips in order to make them alot smaller,
    does anyone know of any company doing this of yet?
    Or of any company with plans of doing it?
  • All most moms or anyone really needs is a 486--
    maybe as much as a P-233.

    Perhaps, but Intel isn't making them anymore. And even with its significantly lower transistor count, a 486 is about twice the size (and presumably, power consumption) of this chip; a 233 more than 4 times as big. You're probably getting close to the size where the wiring pads are a substantial fraction of the total chip size, so further reductions are pointless. And once you get power consumption below a certain level, further reductions are irrelevant compared to the power consumed by other pieces.
  • 486 is about twice the size (and presumably, power consumption) of this chip; a 233 more than 4 times as big

    no but you can still get them at on Ebay :o)

    why waste a ton of money one a new processor your dont need.
  • Hehehe :) I'd like to see you run the latest Windows or even an older Red Hat on a 486 with little memory. Unless you're going to restrict her to web-based browsing and out-of-date productivity software, you're going to be killing that little computer.

    Now, personally, I'm likely to buy one of these chips. Why? Because I like things that don't make a lot of noise. I have three computers in the room I sleep in, and it's getting difficult. If I can replace my routing box with something that's completely fanless(even w/o a harddrive - root partition loaded into ramdisk from CD, lots of memory), then I'm likely to buy it. Right now I'm running a P100, and it's got a fan that's a fair bit louder than what I'd like. Not to mention the fact that the harddrive is always spinning because of logfiles and such.

    Anyways, you get the point. While this may never be more than a niche processor(certain low-power/low-noise usages, ie: webpads, PDAs, notebooks, extremely inexpensive PCs), that doesn't mean it can't be a success. If they don't spend three or four billion dollars making a new plant to manufacture these things, then they could make a fair bit of profit off it, too.

    Dave

    Barclay family motto:
    Aut agere aut mori.
    (Either action or death.)
  • What's wrong with a fan? Low power is useful, I admit, but there are already (farily) low power solutions from Transmeta, Intel, and AMD. Also, most of the laptop's battery is used to power the display, not the CPU (although that may change).

    Fans may have failed you, but they have never failed me. Also, my desktop doesn't need a "high reliability" CPU, it nees one that is cheap so I can spend my money elsewhere.
  • There are a lot of high-reliability applications where the ability to run without a CPU fan is valuable. Examples include military, biomedical instrumentation, process control, etc.

    Uhm? Do you really need this kind of processing power for these kinds of things?!

    To me it sounds like using a 600 MHz Cyrix Samuel2 for any of these things would be a terrific way to waste both money and processor power.

    On the other hand, I do think that it could be useful for laptops / webpads and similar things, as you also mentioned.

    --
  • This CPU is a nice match for the new Asus POLO motherboard, to build a silent & cheap router for example. (or how about a mp3 jukebox?)
  • There are several operations that are involved in 2D performance and several involved in 3D performance. It's not just int v float, but different vector operations. If it supports MMX, then there are 2D and 3D specific MMX instructions (only 2 in each catgory).
  • Ah.... A brave one you are! :)
  • I don't think so. See, I'm working across the road from where Intel makes most of it's PIII and P4 chips.
    You wouldn't believe just how much margin they have in PIII to play with. Seems that they already recouped development costs twice over and P4, though just recently available seems to be doing even better.
    Word has it that the military has ordered large enough quantities to alone warrant the development.

    So, if anything, Intel is likely to drop their prices to ensure dominating market share.

    Then the economic decissions you suggest are more likely to be: "while we don't really need a 1.5Ghz chip, it only costs $20 more than alternatives and we might as well go with the better CPU and save ourselves having to spend money on upgrades again in a few months."

    Also, I sincerely doubt that Transmeta or Cyrix could really afford an open price war with someone that has already recovered development costs. After all, the mere production of the buggers is below $2.00, each.
    But if Transmeta doesn't turn a profit next year, then investors will beat the stock the amazon way - Linus or no Linus...
    The mere fact that IBM changed it's mind and that Toshiba is rethinking their decission as well, makes fundamentalist investors wonder if Transmeta is such a good stock to hold, let alone buy.
  • For some reason people just would not stop calling it "Athalon". Never really understood why. Reading and spelling is just so simple.
  • Dude, AMD USED to be an also-ran. Back in the K5 days. Hell, even during the K6 days -- it's not those chips could really compete on a performance level. AMD's been around a lot longer than you think. They're a leader now, yeah, but things weren't always this way.
  • Office 2000 would have no problems on a 233

    Not to get into any serious MS bashing, I'm just very pissed off at them right now...

    I've never run office 2000 on a 233, so I can't say for sure, but I'm running it on a 333 at the moment and it is dog slow. Its true that once you wait for the damn hour glass to go away some of the programs will run fine, but don't expect to get useable performance off a 233 when running something like access.

    I guess I should get on topic now >:D (or at least on the topic for this thread). All these new fangled fast processors might be considered overkill for some things, but if you look at what people want to run (Windows, Office, etc) the people developing those applications are making no noticable attempt to include any sort of efficiency, therefore one needs to put the fastest processor that he/she can afford into a box just to make it useable. Not that I'm a huge fan of cyrix, but I welcome any cheap processor with reasonably fast speed to the market.
  • I run W/95 on a 486 -- and even have word 97. Yes its not the newest -- but who needs the newest unstable crap anyways. I mean if you can run Xwindows and Sunstaroffice on a 486 -- then windows is no problem.
  • Interesting numbers would be :how fast does it compile a Linux/BSD kernel ,X,KDE ,whatever , how fast Netscape6 loads,...how do they plan to get rid of the Cyrix "good name "....?!

Slashdot Top Deals

Never test for an error condition you don't know how to handle. -- Steinbach

Close