Subject: RE: Intel clones: how well do they work?
To: None <firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com>
From: None <mvanloon@MindBender.serv.net>
Date: 04/03/1998 00:38:18
It should be noted that the Cyrix floating point performance is even
worse than the AMD, if you buy it only for crunching ray traces, or
something similar. The Intel chips still have the best floating point
However, on just about everything else, the K6 should be able to kick
the Intel P5 chips around the block, and the Cyrix will be just a little
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Simon Burge [SMTP:firstname.lastname@example.org]
> Sent: Tuesday, March 31, 1998 5:06 PM
> On Tue, 31 Mar 1998 19:30:34 +6700 (EST) David Jones wrote:
> > How well do the various Intel-clone CPUs work with NetBSD?
> > AMD K6 and Cyrix 6x86 in particular.
> > I know that the Cyrix 486 was royally broken, and will not support
> > I am wary of anything not made by Intel.
> About the only bad thing I've heard about the K6 is that it is not as
> fast as the Intel chips for _heavy_ floating point. The mailling list
> for the GIMPS project for finding large prime numbers quite often has
> "my K6 isn't very fast" thread. Other than that, I've heard nothing
> good reports about them.