K6-3 380 Worth the downgrade from my K6-2 500?

Off topic chat and stuff that doesn't fit elsewhere.
Post Reply
User avatar
KGB
K6'er
Posts: 98
Joined: Mon Apr 07, 2003 7:55 pm

K6-3 380 Worth the downgrade from my K6-2 500?

Post by KGB »

Kinda cheap I guess. They Have a 256K cache and I got 512K onbaord cache.

Whats the spec for a 380Mhz K6-3??

What are the specs for it? 90Mhz fsb What is it? Is the multiplier unlocked?
Would it overclock well? Thanks
User avatar
jsc1973
Veteran K6'er
Posts: 394
Joined: Sat Jun 09, 2001 11:55 am
Contact:

Post by jsc1973 »

K6-III 380 runs at 95 MHz FSB with a 4x multiplier. Those are OEM chips that were marked for the unusual speed to compete with the Celeron 366 back when that was a popular choice.

All K6-series CPU's are multiplier-unlocked. As for what a 380 is capable of, you should have no trouble at all getting 400 (4*100) or on a 503+, a 392 MHz (3.5*112) would be even faster. If you get a good chip, 448 or 450 MHz isn't out of the question.

Whether or not it's faster than a K6-2 500 depends on what types of tasks you're using it for. It will beat the K6-2 on any program that isn't FPU-dependent--the K6-III probably has the fastest ALU performance, clock-for-clock, of any CPU in history. But it usually won't match the K6-2 500's gaming performance unless you get to 450. The cache isn't as important there, clock speed is.
User avatar
KGB
K6'er
Posts: 98
Joined: Mon Apr 07, 2003 7:55 pm

Post by KGB »

Hmm interesting... K6-3 worse than a k6-2? Mind you mine has no on-die cache at all.

My GA-5AX does 120 FSB with ease, I don't even have to raise voltage on my 2.2 K6-2 500.

I'm thinking of maybe a 5x multiplier and 100 FSB for the K6-3 380

Since I don't want to overclock my fsb, if I can change the FSB to 100 and change the multiplier only.

OCZ... does that mean anything? I've seen on ebay those k6-3's posted.. does it stand for better overclocking potential.

If the K6-3 is on the .25 micron level, would it really be hard to get an extra 120 Mhz out of it?

I would settle for 450-475 also :?
User avatar
jsc1973
Veteran K6'er
Posts: 394
Joined: Sat Jun 09, 2001 11:55 am
Contact:

Post by jsc1973 »

The .25 micron K6-III classic won't hit 500 unless you get really, really lucky. AMD had serious problems even making the processor at 450 MHz, and never officially released the K6-III 500.

As I said, 450 MHz is within the realm of possibility, you can raise the core voltage as high as 2.6v if you have adequate cooling, and you'll stand a fair chance of getting there. But the K6-III classic, except for the 333 MHz version (a marked-down 400 in most cases) and the 2.2v 400 MHz version, are very poor overclockers.

The .25 micron K6-III's run very hot. If you plan on overclocking them or raising voltage, keeping them cool is very important. The "plus" versions are a different story, they actually run very cool.

The reason a K6-III won't often outperform a K6-2 in games is that those are heavily FPU-dependent. The CPU's have the same FPU, so clock speed wins out. I still recommend the III because it is so superior in other ways.
Post Reply