Article View: alt.games.quake2
Article #270983Re: Celeron vs. P3 for gaming?
From: noise
Date: Wed, 22 Nov 2000 00:00
Date: Wed, 22 Nov 2000 00:00
23 lines
1584 bytes
1584 bytes
joe crouse wrote: > > i can vouch for the durons they rock the tbirds too > but whats wrong with the k6-2's everyone bashes them but they rock Well yeah but you have to know what you're doing with them... if you play games, make sure you take full advantage of 3dnow! in the games themsevles and drivers wherever possible or they'll be slowish. I've got the K6-3 450 and it's fine, matches PIII's of 450-500mhz *so long as* I've got proper 3dNow! happening (using the correct drivers etc., and is only really that good in games that have GOOD 3dNow! built in.) I use the AMD patch for Quake 2, and the miniGL's are fastest and have good 3dnow support. The ICD's are getting faster but still up to 10% slower than miniGL's on games that have them. Apparantly Quake 3 didn't do a real great job with 3dNow! and they did a better SSE implementation. It's not a great CPU for this game, but I already owned it when that game came out and it was very cheap and it plays ok. Good enough for me... at least till I get my tbird! noise
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<3A1BC70F.7398CF3B@iinet.net.au>Path:
mbox-mo1.pugleaf.net!unknown!not-for-mailReferences:
<8urj96$1f0$1@nnrp1.deja.com> <8urqms$5ei$1@tron.sci.fi> <3a12a4e4.183061@uutiset.nic.fi> <3A131549.F950A885@home.com>Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
From: noise <no...@iinet.net.au> Subject: Re: Celeron vs. P3 for gaming? Date: 2000/11/22 Message-ID: <3A1BC70F.7398CF3B@iinet.net.au> X-Deja-AN: 696637593 References: <8urj96$1f0$1@nnrp1.deja.com> <8urqms$5ei$1@tron.sci.fi> <3a12a4e4.183061@uutiset.nic.fi> <3A131549.F950A885@home.com> X-Accept-Language: en X-Trace: news.iinet.net.au 974898984 30641 RD7...@203.59.80.218 Organization: ENW MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: alt.games.quake2 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit