K6-2+ availability?

[XMan]

The specs look pretty sweet . . . 18u, 128K on-die L2 . . . Tom's reviewed a 550 and overclocked it to 600 fairly easily (they didn't try for much more than that) . . .

Might be a decent upgrade for those Linux-server/RC5 super-7 boxes everybody's running . . . anyone know if we will be able to get them in the retail channel?

 

[Hyper99]

Neverheard of suck thing.
Dude, AMD is getting rid of K6-2 line of product
and going with duron and athlon instead.
checkout www.amd.com for their line of cpu
don't believe everything tomhardware say it could be full of crap
these guy are doing it just to impress someone they are way out of line.
I could make up stories about my K6-2 550 at 600 at 2.4V
running as cool as 40C
which is bull

 

[BurntKooshie]

XeroxMan - I agree. This is a part that they have talked about for a long time, but never really launched. It is intended for the notebook market, not the desktop one The reasoning is that AMD doesn't as yet have a very lower power variation of the Athlon for notebooks . They won't get to the PC market, as AMD has stated, and this is in part due to the fact that they ALREADY have a low end line - the Duron.

K6's kinda suck at RC5 BTW....its because the ROL instruction is VERY slow on K6's compared to other CPU's. (the ROL instruction is used in rc5 a lot, but very littie in other applications, and therefore, wasn't given a priority as to its latency and throughput on the K6).

So, in all likelihood, it will not get into the retail channel (then again, i'm not a business dealer, and can't say for certain).

 

[AdamK47]

It still suprises me to see people posting about getting K6-2 CPUs and overclocking them. I say.... whats the point? Getting a CPU that performs worse than a Celeron and overclocking it between 5% to 10% seems like a waste of effort and money. If I were in these peoples shoes, I'd put the money twards a new motherboard and a better performing/overclocking CPU.

 

[XMan]

Hey, I've got all the hardware just lying around to build a K6-2 system . . . if I need a machine for word processing, or a file server or something, why not spend 50 bucks for a CPU, pop it in, and have a relatively quick machine?

Setting up a Celeron (or Duron, even) requires me to replace a perfectly functional Super7 motherboard, and 64MB of EDO RAM. I'd rather spend 50 clams and have a system than spend 300 for a system that will only be marginally faster for what I'd be using it for - business apps.

IMHO, computer hardware is never obsolete - it will always do what it was designed to do. The software may pass it by, but it will still work fine.

 

[AdamK47]

Is that 64MB of EDO SIMM memory? If so, a lower clocked K6-2 would already be available and wouldn't add more to the already huge memory bottleneck.

 

[DaddyG]

Xeroxman,

I agree that when you got a perfectly good system, why not spend a couple of bucks and upgrade it. Availabilty of the K6-2+ may be a problem, if I recall the review was on Tom's German site not the U.S.
Also, the prices that he quoted seemed a little more than $50. The K6-2+ seems to be a K6-3 with only half the cache so that I assume if your SS7 supports K6-3 it should support K6-2+, of course your L2 Cache becomes L3.

 

[BurntKooshie]

the other additions of the K6-x+ chips are the extended 3dnow! instructions, and PowerNow!

 

[Caitiff]

I'm just wanting to get my hands on one. The K6-2+ is not just a 'chopped k6-3' like was previously mentioned. For one thing, it's built on the .18u die, and thereby has a LOT less heat. 2nd, the review that they did on Toms German site used a 500, not a 550, and it easily o/c to 600 due to the lower heat generated. It also showed that it performed VERY close to the equivalent speed Celeron. What he didn't state in the article was whether that was the original celery, or the Culeron. If it's the Culeron, it would be a VERY tasty upgrade to a supposedly dead platform. I'm eagerly anticpating getting another 6 months or productive gameplay outta my SS7 boards w/ this chip!