RE: FW: about K6 bug
(ex: Office Max here in Anchorage has Packard Bell 200MMX's with 32MB SDRAM, 3GB HD's, 56k modems etc. for $699. The demo at the store has been running for over a month solid now with no problems...). Yep, that's about how long that brand will run :) More seriously, I'd avoid packard bill unless, perhaps, it has been given to you. They have a tendency to use non-standard parts that can't be replaced with standard parts (oddly sized motherboards and the like), and are *grossly* disproportionately represented int the computer from hell gripes. rick -- These opinions will not be those of ISU until it pays my retainer. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
PC Opinions (was RE: FW: about K6 bug)
I'd normally agree, but just as a note here, if you get a Dell, Gateway, Compaq, IBM or NEC you get the same non-standard m/b's (boards with i/o ports on the m/b and cases custom-made to fit). Packard Bell also switched to IBM's MWave sound/modem cards, so they actually have a little quality in them. (I do retail sales and technical support for a living, and most of the PB complaints are from the 386/486 systems, not the late-model MMX systems.) My biggest gripe with them is that there's no BIOS reset jumper on most of them like 'normal' systems, so if you forget a BIOS password or such it's basically screwed. I usually recommend them as low-cost home PC's, NOT something your business and income depends on... -- -- From: Richard E. Hawkins Esq.[SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, June 03, 1998 6:11 AM To: debian-user@lists.debian.org Subject: RE: FW: about K6 bug (ex: Office Max here in Anchorage has Packard Bell 200MMX's with 32MB SDRAM, 3GB HD's, 56k modems etc. for $699. The demo at the store has been running for over a month solid now with no problems...). Yep, that's about how long that brand will run :) More seriously, I'd avoid packard bill unless, perhaps, it has been given to you. They have a tendency to use non-standard parts that can't be replaced with standard parts (oddly sized motherboards and the like), and are *grossly* disproportionately represented int the computer from hell gripes. rick -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: FW: about K6 bug
On Wed, Jun 03, 1998 at 10:11:17AM -0400, Richard E. Hawkins Esq. wrote: (ex: Office Max here in Anchorage has Packard Bell 200MMX's with 32MB SDRAM, 3GB HD's, 56k modems etc. for $699. The demo at the store has been running for over a month solid now with no problems...). Yep, that's about how long that brand will run :) More seriously, I'd avoid packard bill unless, perhaps, it has been given to you. They have a tendency to use non-standard parts that can't be replaced with standard parts (oddly sized motherboards and the like), and are *grossly* disproportionately represented int the computer from hell gripes. That has been my experiance... a demo at a store is one thing... my first PC (as in Intel Based machine...my machine up until that was an Apple II GS- with a blazin 65816 runnin at 2.6 MHz) was a Packard Bell Pentium 100. Within 1 month the mouse died...and currently (going on 2 years later) the keyboard is finiky (not sure if it is the keyboard or the motherboard connector) I got to the point of wanting a bigger system quickly... I was able to add RAM...by contorting my hands in odd ways as to make them fit inside the tiny case (adding a tape drive was even worst) I found out I could not upgrade the processor as they used a cheap motherboard that at most supported a Pentium 100 (gee they didn't advertise that) The system is so weird...it took me an hour to figure out how to open the case (instructions on how to do that were only included in the online docs which I couldn't get for obvious reasons...it was off!) I never did get the soundcard to work under linux...and...do you want to run X on one of their monitors? good luck figuring out what the Hsync and Vsync frequencies are! I was able to figure out from the FCC ID who REALLY made the monitor (what you think Packard Bell makes monitors?) and what its model # really was...from that I was able to get it to work fine. It is my personal current policy that I will never again buy a Name Brand system (with the few exceptions being SUN, DEC, SGI.. when I can afford them ...someday) I have found that with a few careful purchases it is easy to come up witht the parts to build a system rather cheaply...and it is nice to know that you are the one who decided to cut the corner and buy cheap parts...rather than leaving the decision on which parts to spend more on and which parts to buy cheaply to some company. (BTW avoid BIOSTAR motherboards...I have run into one that WILL NOT work with linux...it tested fine with win95 but had IDE errors under linux.) -Steve -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
about K6 bug
Hi all, Recently, there were a lot of post in [EMAIL PROTECTED] concerning new K6 bug. Tests was done by 'crashme'. Here is excerption from Andreas Haumer [EMAIL PROTECTED] report. # OSCPU result 11 Linux-2.0 K6crash 0 Linux-2.0 K6no crash 0 Linux-2.1 K6crash 3 Linux-2.1 K6no crash 0 Linux-2.0 Pentium crash 6 Linux-2.0 Pentium no crash 1 Linux-2.0 K6unclear = Sincerly speaking I have now idea how cricual is this, but as far as I consider K6 as a choice for upgrating my PC, I would like to know how reliable is this assuming that I have no intention to run this testing program very often. Have someone experienced any serious proplem with this cpu? TIA, Eugene Sevinian -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: about K6 bug
On Tue, Jun 02, 1998 at 12:22:15PM +0400, Eugene Sevinian wrote: Recently, there were a lot of post in [EMAIL PROTECTED] concerning new K6 bug. Tests was done by 'crashme'. Here is excerption from Andreas Haumer [EMAIL PROTECTED] report. # OSCPU result 11 Linux-2.0 K6crash 0 Linux-2.0 K6no crash 0 Linux-2.1 K6crash 3 Linux-2.1 K6no crash 0 Linux-2.0 Pentium crash 6 Linux-2.0 Pentium no crash 1 Linux-2.0 K6unclear = Sincerly speaking I have now idea how cricual is this, but as far as I consider K6 as a choice for upgrating my PC, I would like to know how reliable is this assuming that I have no intention to run this testing program very often. I followed this thread from when it started and my conclusions up to now are: 1) It appears to show up only under circumstances not easily found in real life. Someone now posted a short test program that will crash a K6. This is not worse than the Intel F0 0F bug. 2) 2.1 kernels are immune to this crash, and as these are in almost as deep freeze as debian 2.0 is now :-), 2.2 is not too far away and the problem goes away. I do not yet see a reason to buy an Intel instead. Nils -- *-* | Quotes from the net: L Linus Torvalds, W Winfried Truemper | | Lthis is the special easter release of linux, more mundanely called 1.3.84 | | WUmh, oh. What do you mean by special easter release?. Will it quit | * Wworking today and rise on easter? * pgpdkBKNlrnD5.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: about K6 bug
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- On Tue, 02 Jun 1998, Nils Rennebarth wrote: On Tue, Jun 02, 1998 at 12:22:15PM +0400, Eugene Sevinian wrote: Recently, there were a lot of post in [EMAIL PROTECTED] concerning new K6 bug. Tests was done by 'crashme'. Here is excerption from Andreas Haumer [EMAIL PROTECTED] report. # OSCPU result 11 Linux-2.0 K6crash 0 Linux-2.0 K6no crash 0 Linux-2.1 K6crash 3 Linux-2.1 K6no crash 0 Linux-2.0 Pentium crash 6 Linux-2.0 Pentium no crash 1 Linux-2.0 K6unclear = Sincerly speaking I have now idea how cricual is this, but as far as I consider K6 as a choice for upgrating my PC, I would like to know how reliable is this assuming that I have no intention to run this testing program very often. I followed this thread from when it started and my conclusions up to now are: 1) It appears to show up only under circumstances not easily found in real life. Someone now posted a short test program that will crash a K6. This is not worse than the Intel F0 0F bug. 2) 2.1 kernels are immune to this crash, and as these are in almost as deep freeze as debian 2.0 is now :-), 2.2 is not too far away and the problem goes away. I do not yet see a reason to buy an Intel instead. Nils besides I have been running an overclocked K6 (233 - 266) for 4 Months now. Whereas win95 crashes regularly (it does so anyway), Linux didn't crash once. During this time I compiled several kernels, created highly compressed MP3s played Quake2 for hours, burned a gazillion of CDs. I don't know what this testing program is about, but the highly customized 2.0.33 kernel I use never complained about the K6. - -- Stone's Law: One man's simple is another man's huh? - -- == Christian Zander * web: ishmael.ml.org/~zander * email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] == -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: 2.6.3ia Charset: noconv iQCVAwUBNXPshLtAzGtVrTsdAQEBEwP9Fu+axq4wpB5OQclFS5DeqE6LueiS3oA9 kA0NSIutgTYXbmuZwes72+9YjxBW980j0a1FEhRYHdb7Iy/h1/PepluhyTNZQffQ bP0Mwv+RHs8L9R1+3/CjyBtG2mGGBoBbJxmSnFpe8DCCBtk4rHmlvhamG8xorvKi xBcJJLCICOs= =g1of -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: about K6 bug
On Tue, Jun 02, 1998 at 12:22:15PM +0400, Eugene Sevinian wrote: Sincerly speaking I have now idea how cricual is this, but as far as I consider K6 as a choice for upgrating my PC, I would like to know how reliable is this assuming that I have no intention to run this testing program very often. Have someone experienced any serious proplem with this cpu? I have used a K6-233 for about 8 months now (until yesterday). It hasn't crashed in linux, and I've had uptimes 2 months before rebooting to windows. I used an AMD 5x86-133 before the K6. I just upgraded to a PII-400 because I need the speed for some applications for work. The new motherboard/cpu is slightly more than 2x faster than the K6 on my applications so far. I would recommend AMD processors and I've got friends who really like their cyrix chips on linux. -- Lee Bradshaw [EMAIL PROTECTED] (preferred) Alantro Communications [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
FW: about K6 bug
Same results here - I'm running on a K5-75 (one of the 486-133 turbo-chips) in a Digital DECPC and not having any problems (no problems that I didn't cause, anyway). Heard about all kinds of bugs in all the different chips (AMD, Cyrix, MMX, PII, etc.) and have yet to run into one on my systems (I have a K5-75, an Intel 486/100 and a PII-266 all running Debian). -- -- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, June 02, 1998 6:34 AM To: Debian Users Subject: Re: about K6 bug On Tue, Jun 02, 1998 at 12:22:15PM +0400, Eugene Sevinian wrote: Sincerly speaking I have now idea how cricual is this, but as far as I consider K6 as a choice for upgrating my PC, I would like to know how reliable is this assuming that I have no intention to run this testing program very often. Have someone experienced any serious proplem with this cpu? I have used a K6-233 for about 8 months now (until yesterday). It hasn't crashed in linux, and I've had uptimes 2 months before rebooting to windows. I used an AMD 5x86-133 before the K6. I just upgraded to a PII-400 because I need the speed for some applications for work. The new motherboard/cpu is slightly more than 2x faster than the K6 on my applications so far. I would recommend AMD processors and I've got friends who really like their cyrix chips on linux. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: FW: about K6 bug
I used one of the retail-boxed upgrade chips from Kingston or Evergreen somebody like that (got it at Computer City, red box). My DECPC was originally a 486/33 and supported the 486/66 or OverDrive chips; I used the little bitty DIPs under the chip to set it to 4x instead of 3x, set the clock on the board to 33mhz and the chip to OverDrive and didn't have any problems. Tested under DOS with a boot disk test program (they include) and fiddled with switches until I got the 133 speed and stable operation (some settings aren't stable and others only resulted in 100mhz clock). I've never bought a m/b for Linux, but I'd say something like a Micronics or other high-quality m/b should work good. I'd get one with SDRAM or EDO (each being equal I'd get SDRAM, but EDO boards are probably a lot cheaper), a EIDE disk controller on board (so you can add your choice of SCSI boards - compatibility, since there's only a couple chipsets on m/b's), and the highest clock speed you can find (83mhz is good, or wait a month or two and get a 100mhz board with socket 7 so you can use the newer faster chips coming out). I've heard good things from other people about the better (read: more expensive) ASUS boards, or you could get a whole PC with a 166 or 200 Pentium or AMD for fairly cheap (ex: Office Max here in Anchorage has Packard Bell 200MMX's with 32MB SDRAM, 3GB HD's, 56k modems etc. for $699. The demo at the store has been running for over a month solid now with no problems...). I'm sure there'll be lots of answers to this one, but since you asked :-)... -- -- From: DAVID B. TEAGUE[SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, June 02, 1998 1:08 PM To: Hogland, Thomas E. Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: FW: about K6 bug On Tue, 2 Jun 1998, Hogland, Thomas E. wrote: Same results here - I'm running on a K5-75 (one of the 486-133 turbo-chips) in a Digital DECPC and not having any problems (no problems that I didn't cause, anyway). Heard about all kinds of bugs in all the different chips (AMD, Cyrix, MMX, PII, etc.) and have yet to run into one on my systems (I have a K5-75, an Intel 486/100 and a PII-266 all running Debian). Hi Thomas Is the K5-75 a drop in replacement ofr the 486 66? Where does one get the K5-75? I have a 486-66 that could use some improvement. I have a 386-25 that sports an EARLY Cyrix sort-of-486 with 1k cache that could use a mother board transplant. I'm not afraid of Cyrix nor of K5 or K6, but I would like some advice before buying something I can't eat. I hope several of my boards will be made unnecessary (disk contoller, io ports video). Got any recommendations for a mother board say Pentium, 233 MHz, 512 K preferably 1MB cache, space for a bunch of memory, disk contoller on board? --- LINUX: the FREE 32 bit OS for [3456]86 PC's available NOW! David B Teague | Ask me how user interface copyrights software [EMAIL PROTECTED] | patents make programing a dangerous business. National Security Council nuclear explosion Treasury destabilize Pakistan Delta Force atomic bomb India data encryption data encryption munitions counter-intelligence wild porno sex gold bullion Soviet clipper terrorist hydrazine ammonium nitrate fuel oil cocaine assassinate counterfeit spy -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: about K6 bug
On Tue, 2 Jun 1998, Eugene Sevinian wrote: Hi all, Hi Eugene! Recently, there were a lot of post in [EMAIL PROTECTED] concerning new K6 bug. Tests was done by 'crashme'. Here is excerption from Andreas Haumer [EMAIL PROTECTED] report. [... snipping this report ...] Sincerly speaking I have now idea how cricual is this, but as far as I consider K6 as a choice for upgrating my PC, I would like to know how reliable is this assuming that I have no intention to run this testing program very often. Have someone experienced any serious proplem with this cpu? As far as I can say, there are no problems with the AMD K6 CPUs. I have two AMDs here at home (one AMD 586-DX/4-120 which is no K6, and a real AMD K6 PR2-200) and several at work, and they don't make problems at all. They are running both under Linux (at home) and Win95 (at work, sniff...) and the only disadvantage to the Pentiums is the slower FPU. A Pentium 166 runs POVray faster than a K6-200. But when you are not doing much arithmetics, the K6 is the CPU of choice, because it has a very good price/speed/quality relation. But you should think about the board, in which your K6 should work. You should search for an Intel HX chipset or another chipset which supports more than 64 MB cacheable area. But be aware, not every old board supports the K6. Bye Daniel -- Daniel Gross eMail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Hollarstrasse 2 [EMAIL PROTECTED] D-85053 Ingolstadt, Germany -- Gee, Toto, I don't think we are in Kansas anymore. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
