which would perform better, all else being equal: an AMD K6-2 at 500mhz, or an Intel Pentium II at 366mhz? Preform regular PC maintenance to keep your PC running like new. For suggestions on free security virus/spyware removal and optimizing utils and software, visit my web site.

There aren't any P2 366s-there are 333s and 350s though. Unless this is a mobile? But a P2 of around that speed would perform similarly or slightly better the 500MHz K6-2. Only the K6-3s with their on-die cache were able to outperform the P2. The K6-2 suffers from a horrendously weak floating point math unit and an equally slow level 2 cache. AMD didn't shine till the K7 (Athlon). The K6s were popular as upgrades for users stuck with 5th generation, Socket 7 motherboards.

Did you meant Celeron 366Mhz or Mobile Pentium II 366Mhz? TMP-Man Asus P5P800-SE P4 506 2.66Ghz @ 4100Mhz 1.525v Thermaltake CLP0024 w/ 2000RPM FAN 1024MB DC Corsair DDR400 40GB 5400RPM/120GB 7200RPM HD 128MB Radoen 9500 mod 9700 @ 360/585

jackbomb I really respect what you achieve with some of those old systems you tinker with. I'm currently posting from a K6-2 400. Don't you think the k6-2 would have a advantage over the 333 due to the higher FSB, of course this is not the case with the 350. The 512k L2 cache on those slot one Processors were ahead of there time, even if they were only half speed. Does the K6-2 even have an L2 cache? larry

Thanks Larry! Whadja think of my super P2? lol A P2-333 would probably tie against a K6-500 because of the slower bus. The K6-2 didn't have any on-die (or even on-package) L2 cache. The L2 cache K6-2 systems was located on the motherboard, just like the RAM. The cache bandwidth was severely limited, as the processor could only access it at the speed of its external bus, which in the K6-2's case, was 66-100MHz. Also, because the cache was so far away from the CPU, latency was quite high compared to the P2's closely-coupled cache and the Celeron's on-die cache. This, along with the horrible FPU, is what made the K6-2 so slow against the P2 and Celeron.

If windows 95 were the operating system I would think the k6-2 would be the better choice except for games, for business apps it would be superior to the pentium II 333. Once you start win 98 and up the cache would come into play more heavily and the pII would start to move ahead. For non graphic intensive tasks the k6 line were quite acceptable cpu`s.

amen jackbomb i respect what you do as well no this is not a P2 @ 333mhz or 350mhz or a Cleron @ 366mhz. It is actually a P2-350 that has been *very slightly* overclocked to run at 366mhz, on acount of the mobo being one of the first generation Slot 1 boards, and not supporting a 100mhz FSB. Preform regular PC maintenance to keep your PC running like new. For suggestions on free security virus/spyware removal and optimizing utils and software, visit my web site.