On Tue, 09 Aug 2005 23:14:26 GMT, "Donald McTrevor"
<me@privacy.net> wrote:


>Well I did find the results surprising so maybe they
>are wromg, my experience so far is that the K6 is very slow!!

It is very slow. However, it's still faster than the CPU it
replaced IF it's running properly. I suspect you have
motherboard settings wrong, and that is why I suggested
checking the operational parameters with CPU-Z.


>
>I might have got the settings wrong, either way I had problems
>I also set some jumpers wrong the first time i tried, which
>may have damaged the chip? Maybe I was sold a duff chip?

Setting the wrong multiplier or FSB will not damage the
chip, however if it were operating beyond what it can do
stabily, it could corrupt data, the realtime running state
of the OS and/or anything subsequently written to any
drive(s). Providing you had the voltage at correct (2.2 or
2.4V) setting then the CPU should be fine.

Since your CPU is a 300MHz version, you might try Google
searching for it's specific model code- there were a few
"rare" 300MHz versions of the K6-2 that had cache problems
and as a result, AMD spec'd them to only run at 66MHz FSB,
no faster than that. It was an initial confusion in the
industry at the time because it had been expected that all
300MHz parts could run at 3 x 100MHz FSB, and later they did
fix the problem so there were subsequent 300MHz versions
that were spec'd for 3 x 100MHz FSB instead of 4.5 x 66MHz
FSB.


>I can't claim this because I ran it with bad settings myself
>first time. However it sill seems to work.
>I cant see how I could damage it so that it would run slowly though.

Setting the multiplier too low would cause it. If you had
been doing anything in the bios, perhaps you accidentally
disabled the L2 cache?