>   >  So would this make the P5 compare that much better to a P6, or is the P6
>   >  still the way to go?

>No, we all said P6.
>In fact, we all seem to be in violent agreement here, although discussing the
>fine points has been fun. But to summarize:
>	P6 at any clock rate beats P5 on all but one narrow category
>	P6 at 150 MHz is an unbeatable value, but if you have the money,
>		you can go faster, or just overclock
>	K6 is a P6-class performer, but disturbing reports are in
>		regarding initial problems and reliability
>	MMX is pointless
>		(except for Intel, it brings them $ from uneducated consumers)

Actually, we didn't agree that MMX is pointless, because you _do_ get
a bigger cache, which could boost performance slightly.  However, as
you point out, you have decide whether the much higher cost is worth a
slightly larger cache.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
  Michael L. VanLoon                           michaelv@MindBender.serv.net
        --<  Free your mind and your machine -- NetBSD free un*x  >--
    NetBSD working ports: 386+PC, Mac 68k, Amiga, Atari 68k, HP300, Sun3,
        Sun4/4c/4m, DEC MIPS, DEC Alpha, PC532, VAX, MVME68k, arm32...
    NetBSD ports in progress: PICA, others...
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------