Is the Quadro2 based on the same GPU as the GeForce2? A GeForce2 would probably be even better than the Quadro2 because GeForce cards are better optimized for games than Quadros are.

They are about 95% alike. The difference is analogous to normal and server processors.

Quadro2 Pro is basically a Geforce2 Pro with 64 MB. I installed also the usual Detonator driver.
So the scores should be identical as if using a Geforce2 Pro.

The good thing on the Quadro2 card is that it has a VGA and DVI connector. (not Multi View capable though)
http://mail.lipsia.de/~enigma/neu/pics/elsa_g … 2_pro_front.jpg

No. The scores will be different. Cad cards are programmed to prioritize precision and quality over speed.

Well, I just have a normal GF2 GTS with lower clockrates to test vs. the Quadro2, but I think with a K6-2+ at 600 MHz there will be no real difference due to the strong CPU limitation of both cards.

According the K6-2+ etc.
Some months ago there was a community order for K6-2+ CPUs from the voodooalert forum from this seller: http://www.ebay.de/itm/AMD-K6-III-AMD-K6-3-Re … =item415c5de53a

elianda wrote:

Well, I just have a normal GF2 GTS with lower clockrates to test vs. the Quadro2, but I think with a K6-2+ at 600 MHz there will be no real difference due to the strong CPU limitation of both cards.

According the K6-2+ etc.
Some months ago there was a community order for K6-2+ CPUs from the voodooalert forum from this seller: http://www.ebay.de/itm/AMD-K6-III-AMD-K6-3-Re … =item415c5de53a

Yikes that is expensive and more than what I paid for a Q8200 😵

You paid less than 25$ for a Q8200? Lucky you! These usually go for 60-70 euro here in Greece!
Elianda, you seem to have tested the K6-2+ at 600MHz quite a bit, how does it compare to other processors?
I'm guessing a Pentiun II 400 trumps it, but how about 66MHz FSB PII and Celerons?

F2bnp wrote:

You paid less than 25$ for a Q8200? Lucky you! These usually go for 60-70 euro here in Greece!
Elianda, you seem to have tested the K6-2+ at 600MHz quite a bit, how does it compare to other processors?
I'm guessing a Pentiun II 400 trumps it, but how about 66MHz FSB PII and Celerons?

The K6-3 and K6-2+/3+ by them selves is sometimes almost equal to a P3 at the same clocks but that is where it ends. SS7 boards are just too slow for the K6-2/3+ to really shine.

Yeah I should clarify, I mean gaming wise. They were obviously great deals back then, mostly being just as fast as Intel's offerings in everyday usage. Gaming is a completely different world though and I don't think anyone here would use a K6-2/3 for anything other than building a Retro PC for the sole purpose of playing video games!

F2bnp wrote:

You paid less than 25$ for a Q8200? Lucky you! These usually go for 60-70 euro here in Greece!
Elianda, you seem to have tested the K6-2+ at 600MHz quite a bit, how does it compare to other processors?
I'm guessing a Pentiun II 400 trumps it, but how about 66MHz FSB PII and Celerons?

I must admit I have not much comparison vs. 66 MHz FSB P2s. I would have to setup a system first...
I think at Integer you can compare the performance with a 64 kB Duron at the same clock speed while it is less prone to unoptimized code.
With the FPU maybe near a P2 300 MHz (just a guess).
What I noticed is that 3DNow! optimized drivers for the Voodoo2 reach nearly the same speed as the Quadro2 with the Detonator driver at lower detail games. At high detail games Quadro2 is getting much faster.
f.e. at Neverwinter Nights with 64 MB Texture Pack.

F2bnp wrote:

Yeah I should clarify, I mean gaming wise. They were obviously great deals back then, mostly being just as fast as Intel's offerings in everyday usage. Gaming is a completely different world though and I don't think anyone here would use a K6-2/3 for anything other than building a Retro PC for the sole purpose of playing video games!

In gaming they are not to much to gripe about if the rest of the system isn't too terrible. Won't be equal clock for clock but they should keep up with a 400mhz p2 just fine. Intel really had the advantage bandwidth wise while the fpu is very sensitive to memory i/o performance. Personally using os level tweaks and keeping the installed programs that loaded on start up to a bare minimum helps.

luckybob wrote:

No. The scores will be different. Cad cards are programmed to prioritize precision and quality over speed.

The biggest difference is in the driver (and firmware). The premium of the Quadro line lies in the drivers optimized for CAD applications and official support for such professional applications. Hardware-wise, they both offer the same potential of precision level and quality, provided they are using chips of same class and similar configurations. However it is the firmware & driver combination that will 'unlock' that potential for supported applications. In some CAD applications the difference can be so huge (yes, talking about speed) akin to the difference between non-accelerated and hardware-accelerated 3D, thanks to the optimized driver.

In the case of older, non-hardware-locked Quadro models that have direct equivalent in the GeForce line, they will perform similarly to the GeForce model if you flash them with a GeForce firmware and use the GeForce driver (and of course, set the clock speeds to match). And vice versa.

I ordered an unsoldered CPU "for collection purposes" and it was a mobile CPU. I'm sure it varies from type to type but the one i got doesn't work in desktop motherboards.

I have put here some images of my K6-2+ system.
ftp://78.46.141.148/pictures/k62p_system/

Just got a K6-3+ 400 today and pushed it 550 (600 seems to be a no go on this one 🙁 ), but I'm still experiencing some pretty weird performance.
It runs great on some games, mediocre on others. This shouldn't be the case really, I'm getting 45FPS and 35FPS on Turok 2 and Shogo (RevShogo) respectively at 1024x768 with a Voodoo 3 3500 (OCed 3000 actually).

Initially I was thinking that maybe my HDD was the fault, since it is acting kinda funny. It is pretty loud, but it could be just me.
Then it struck me. I'm using an AWE64 Gold on an ISA Slot, could this card be holding the whole system back with its slow bus?
It still doesn't make sense for Quake 2 with crusher.dm2 giving out 18fps... That is with sound disabled.

I'll definitely do a format, but I just want to make sure if anything else is causing a problem. I should note I'm using DX7.0a.

So what does ctcm7r tell you about caching and memory?
What board do you use?
It is unlikely that the AWE64 hits performance in a considerable amount.
Do you use any 3DNow! optimized stuff?

And then it could as well be that for FPU performance the raw clock rate is more important than the caches for a K6 design.

elianda wrote:

So what does ctcm7r tell you about caching and memory? What board do you use? It is unlikely that the AWE64 hits performance in […]
Show full quote

So what does ctcm7r tell you about caching and memory?
What board do you use?
It is unlikely that the AWE64 hits performance in a considerable amount.
Do you use any 3DNow! optimized stuff?

And then it could as well be that for FPU performance the raw clock rate is more important than the caches for a K6 design.

Haven't tried ctcm7r, but speedsys reports correct speed and cache. I should note I'm using 2x64MB SDRAM sticks at 100MHz. WCPUID and Everest Home 2.0 also report the correct speed and cache, however Everest Ultimate (can't remember which version) reports that I'm running a 50MHz bus... This seems like a bug to me, but I sure hope it isn't!
All of this running on a GA-5AX rev 4.1 and F4 Bios (latest) installed.
Oh and Win98SE 😁

I just took a couple of photos from my BIOS settings. Anything look weird to you guys?

A20 Fast,
HDD Block Mode Enabled,
optional enable SMART
Passive Release enabled
PCi Delayed Transaction enabled

I tweaked the BIOS settings, but still no real gain.
Here's what ctcm7r displayed:

I should recap, I've got a K6-3+ 400 running at 550 and am receiving very crippled performance, regardless of resolution.
e.g.
Quake 2 Crusher with 3Dnow! Open GL Driver at 1024x768: 21fps
Quake 2 Demo1.dm2 : 44fps
Expendable 1024x768 : 22fps
Quake 3 High Quality : 36fps (actually not that bad)

I've tried different RAM sticks, harddrive, soundcard... None of that cripples the performance and I'm sure it is not the CPU as the K6-2 400 I had beforehand produced very similar performance.
Could it be my Voodoo 3 3000 PCI? Doubt it, this card has helped me a ton over the years.
I might stick a GF4MX and see what happens.