Which is the better CPU? Socket 7

[Larry Roberts]

A guy at my brother's job wants to install a soundcard into
his very old PC. It's a Compaq 2260 desktop. Most of these guys don't
know anything about computers, and the most modern system I've worked
on so far was an Intel Celeron 2Ghz based Notebook a few years ago.
Most are Win98 based systems.
I haven't recieved the system from him yet, but looking at the
specs. on Compaq's website, it says it has sound. I'm thinking the
guy, or family members flubbered the OS up, and killed the sound, and
he thinks it physically broke. Anyway, I noticed the system uses a
Cyrix MII 300 CPU. It runs at 233Mhz. I have some Intel Pentium 233Mhz
MMX cpus sitting around. Which would be better? I'm thinking the Intel
would be more stable.

 

[Kent_Diego]

.... Anyway, I noticed the system uses a

Cyrix MII 300 CPU. It runs at 233Mhz. I have some Intel Pentium 233Mhz
MMX cpus sitting around. Which would be better? I'm thinking the Intel
would be more stable.

According to:
http://www.kingli.com/cpu-compare.htm
The Cyrix MII 300 is slightly more powerful. I also would think the Pentium
233 is likely to be more stable.

 

[Mike T.]

According to:
http://www.kingli.com/cpu-compare.htm
The Cyrix MII 300 is slightly more powerful. I also would think the
Pentium 233 is likely to be more stable.

Well, you'd be wrong. Cyrix (later bought by VIA, and still making
processors under the "VIA" name) always made great processors that ran
faster than similar Intel chips, and were JUST as stable.

The problem was, these Cyrix chips were priced very low. That was a
problem, as they tended to attract CHEAP system builders. So you'd have
well-engineered Cyrix CPUs ending up in systems with crap motherboards, crap
power supplies, very little thought put into designing the whole system
(rather than just throwing a bunch of parts together), etc. Consequently,
the Cyrix CPUs got an -undeserved- bad rep. as being
cheap/unstable/crap/insert your own derogative adjective.

AMD has fared overall better than Cyrix/VIA. While AMD procs. are better
engineered than similar Intel chips (just like Cyrix was), AMD has managed
to attract the enthusiast/gamers/OC'ers crowd of builders. Yeah, there are
some "cheap" builders who have jumped on the AMD bandwagon, but the feedback
from AMD builders has been overwhelmingly positive, to the point where AMD
could very well dominate the CPU market within a few very short years.
"Dominate", meaning, AMD could get to the point where Intel is playing
catchup to try to reach AMD sales levels.

The likely outcome of replacing a Cyrix CPU with a similar Intel CPU is that
you end up with a system that is just as stable, but slower. Plus, you risk
damaging 2 different CPUs and at least one mainboard by doing the swap.
It's not worth it. Leave the Cyrix processor where it is. -Dave

 

[Conor]

According to:
http://www.kingli.com/cpu-compare.htm
The Cyrix MII 300 is slightly more powerful.

ROFLMAO...you obviously weren't around at the time...

 

[Conor]

A guy at my brother's job wants to install a soundcard into
his very old PC. It's a Compaq 2260 desktop. Most of these guys don't
know anything about computers, and the most modern system I've worked
on so far was an Intel Celeron 2Ghz based Notebook a few years ago.
Most are Win98 based systems.
I haven't recieved the system from him yet, but looking at the
specs. on Compaq's website, it says it has sound. I'm thinking the
guy, or family members flubbered the OS up, and killed the sound, and
he thinks it physically broke. Anyway, I noticed the system uses a
Cyrix MII 300 CPU. It runs at 233Mhz. I have some Intel Pentium 233Mhz
MMX cpus sitting around. Which would be better? I'm thinking the Intel
would be more stable.

The Intel kicks the Cyrix's arse. The FPU's in the Cyrix CPUs was
extremely weak and the PR300 rating was at best, optimisitic and at
worst a downright lie.

 

[Dave]

ROFLMAO...you obviously weren't around at the time...

I was. The Cyrix was the better chip, at the time. -Dave

 

[Clint]

Personally, and since you're asking for opinions, I don't think it will
matter too much. It's kind of like asking someone if they'd like to be
poked in the eye with a metal rod or a pointy stick. Either one's gonna
hurt like a bugger after using anything close to a modern computer. At
best, you're looking at something that runs at 10% of current machine's
speeds, and the difference between the two processors will probably be 10%
of that.

In any case, it's hard to physically kill hardware using software, but I'm
sure it's possible. Likely some driver got corrupted/deleted, or some BIOS
setting got mucked. Or if you go back far enough, you've got some sort of
IRQ conflict...

Clint, who came from the era of smokin' 12MHz 286 processors...

 

[Larry Roberts]

Personally, and since you're asking for opinions, I don't think it will
matter too much. It's kind of like asking someone if they'd like to be
poked in the eye with a metal rod or a pointy stick. Either one's gonna
hurt like a bugger after using anything close to a modern computer. At
best, you're looking at something that runs at 10% of current machine's
speeds, and the difference between the two processors will probably be 10%
of that.

In any case, it's hard to physically kill hardware using software, but I'm
sure it's possible. Likely some driver got corrupted/deleted, or some BIOS
setting got mucked. Or if you go back far enough, you've got some sort of
IRQ conflict...

Clint, who came from the era of smokin' 12MHz 286 processors...

That's what I'm thinking as far as the soundcard issue. These
guys are all around their 40's, and 50's (bought PCs for kids
homework), and none of them really work with computers at all. Their
expirence is just "point & click". You can imagine what the OS looks
like when they've had it for years, been "point & clicking" all over
the net (and every popup & email), and never updated the OS from the
default OEM configuration. I usally just do a HDD format, and fresh OS
install & update, and the system runs like a new machine for them.
As for the CPU, I was just wondering, cause I never had a
Cyrix, or knew anyone that did. I started getting into PCs around
93'/94' (Packad Hell 486 SX2-50Mhz). The only thing I ever heard about
Cyrix was from local BBS users, none of which owned one, who said the
FPU was inferiour, and that some programs had trouble running on Cyrix
chips. I remember there where some games like Quake that needed a
patch to run on Cyrix chips, so it made me wonder.
I doubt this guy will be running anything like Quake on the
machine, so since both chips perform about the same, I'm not gona
bother. I'll just deal with his sound issue.

 

[Clint]

I used to do support for systems back in the era of the Packard Hell 386/486
computers (we even sold them, shame on me), and it did seem that there was
more of an issue of compatability back then than there is now. I used to
have an AMD 386DX/40 machine, and you'd occasionally have to get a patch for
a game (downloaded at 2400 baud!) to make it work with your processor.

I'd stick with your gut, and just do the sound card/OS thing. Either that,
or tell them it's just not going to work; shell out the $300 for a low-end
Dell and call it done. Then Dell can support them!

Clint

 

[David Maynard]

A guy at my brother's job wants to install a soundcard into
his very old PC. It's a Compaq 2260 desktop. Most of these guys don't
know anything about computers, and the most modern system I've worked
on so far was an Intel Celeron 2Ghz based Notebook a few years ago.
Most are Win98 based systems.
I haven't recieved the system from him yet, but looking at the
specs. on Compaq's website, it says it has sound. I'm thinking the
guy, or family members flubbered the OS up, and killed the sound, and
he thinks it physically broke.

I'd suspect the same thing and it could be as simple as the drivers being
messed up. Check Device Manager when you get it.

Anyway, I noticed the system uses a
Cyrix MII 300 CPU. It runs at 233Mhz. I have some Intel Pentium 233Mhz
MMX cpus sitting around. Which would be better? I'm thinking the Intel
would be more stable.

Integer performance on the Cyrix II 300 will be better than the Intel
233MMX but it's FPU stinks so it depends on how they use it. For simple
things the Cyrix will be a bit faster.

 

[Conor]

I was. The Cyrix was the better chip, at the time. -Dave

Provided you didn't want to do anything involving games, encoding etc
etc.

 

[`AMD tower]

for what it's worth, I built a cyrix system about 4 years ago for a friend
who was on a budget. It's been in daily use ever since. It runs word,
excel, outlook express, a browser, digital camera stuff, and a scanner. No
problems. Runs xp home with 512Mb ram. It's rock solid.

Mike