Best and worst CPUs since 1998

Discussion in 'CPUs and Overclocking' started by Shephard, Nov 7, 2012.

  1. tweakboy

    tweakboy Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2010
    Messages:
    9,498
    Likes Received:
    1
    Best PC 1998 CPU Intel 2 450Mhz on a P2B mobo with scsi built in, and a cheetah 9GB drive without monitor cost me 2200 dollars , oh and 256MB RAM. But guy I bought it off was nice,,,, he would get me the new video card I would return old as new stuff came out and back then it was Riva TNT then TNT 2 then voodoo3 for UT99 lol good ole days. Where everything seemed amazing LOL were spoiled now with CPUs soo fast most of us wil never grasp its full potential and choke it besides rendering.. gl
     
  2. Aikouka

    Aikouka Lifer

    Joined:
    Nov 27, 2001
    Messages:
    26,982
    Likes Received:
    1
    I loved my first-gen X2. Back then, I probably never would have suspected that multiple cores would have helped me out, but you never realize how much crap is happening without you actually seeing it until you have all them cores to feed!

    Although, my lordy... they were expensive! :eek:

    AMD Athlon 64 X2 4400+ Toledo 2.2GHz Socket 939 Dual-Core Processor ADA4400DAA6CD - OEM
    $615.0
     
  3. tynopik

    tynopik Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2004
    Messages:
    3,807
    Likes Received:
    2
    Which is what made the 1.13 PIII such an epic fail

    if you bought a Cyrix, well you deserved what you got

    but for Intel to release such a bad product was a huge black eye

    how it managed to get through QA raised serious questions about all of Intel's procedures
     
  4. Arkaign

    Arkaign Lifer

    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2006
    Messages:
    19,305
    Likes Received:
    0
    Hahah I had all of those chips! I loved the AXP 1700+ (mine was mobile), 2500+. I wasn't crazy about the 1.4Ghz T-Bird though, I thought it was a bridge too far. Even with a thermalright copper heatsink and super loud high-RPM Delta fan, mine was unstable within about a month of being new, and I had to downclock it to 100FSB to make it stable. With the stock HS/Fan it was insanely hot, maybe the hottest thing I've ever seen, and I've run Prescotts and Ivys. Of course heatsinks have gotten larger over the years, but my lord. I think it died within a few months of use. I replaced it with an AXP 1500+, and it was miles and miles better.
     
  5. kowalabearhugs

    Joined:
    Sep 19, 2010
    Messages:
    185
    Likes Received:
    0
  6. VirtualLarry

    VirtualLarry Lifer

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2001
    Messages:
    33,366
    Likes Received:
    33
    I had an AXP 1800+, which I overclocked a little in the BIOS (were multipliers locked back then, I forget). The BIOS would show 2000+ for the speed.

    I couldn't get it any higher, because the 1800+ CPU I had defaulted to 1.5v, and the faster grades of AXPs had 1.6v stock voltage, but the BIOS on my MSI board limited me to a 0.05v overvolt. So I couldn't even reach the stock voltage for the faster chips.

    It was a very stable rig though, even with a Via chipset (KT400).
     
  7. SPBHM

    SPBHM Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2012
    Messages:
    4,013
    Likes Received:
    4
    I know some unhappy people who owned the 939 X2,
    first X2 were quite expensive compared to single core CPUs, not a long time later Intel released the Core 2 Duo (when Dual Cores started to really get relevant) which was just far superior, and the AMD pricing was just bad, even more with AMD abandoning 939 and going for AM2 around the same time...
    while Intel released some cheap e2xxx and e4xxx later which could beat even the fastest K8 if you overclocked it...
    I think the original K8 was a lot more exciting than the K8 X2.

    as for me, I bought one k8 X2 Brisbane g1 (when it was already quite cheap, but I regret not buying a e2140/e2160 instead), it was awful to overclock, slower than windsor, and I ended UP upgrading to a E5200, now that was a great little CPU, almost as good as the XP 1700 in my opinion, you could get 4GHz and stock e8xxx level of performance for a lot less.


    [​IMG]

    cheapest AMD dual core at the time Athlon 64 X2 4200+
    $537

    cheapest Intel dual core
    Pentium D 820
    $241

    one year later you could buy this:
    Intel Core 2 Duo E6300 1.86GHz 2MB $183

    and it could easily beat this:
    AMD Athlon 64 X2 4200+ 2.2GHz 512KBx2 $240
    AMD Athlon 64 X2 3800+ 2.0GHz 512KBx2 $169
     
  8. crazymonkeyzero

    crazymonkeyzero Senior member

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2012
    Messages:
    363
    Likes Received:
    0
    When I think of the phrase ,best cpu, I mean it as the biggest jump from previous generation/and or ahead of it's time (in a good, way, unlike bulldozer haha) 1 Conroe: Core2 Duo/Quad as ppl already mentioned, still holding up 6 years later. 2 AMD Athlon 64 Series Sigh~~back when AMD was truly giving Intel a run for their money... 3. Sandy Bridge. I though it was a considerable jump from 1366. I can't really think of a worst chip, but If I really had to choose it would be Pentium 4, bc I saw hardly any difference between it and Pentium 3, at least from my use...
     
    #83 crazymonkeyzero, Nov 8, 2012
    Last edited: Nov 8, 2012
  9. frozentundra123456

    frozentundra123456 Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2008
    Messages:
    8,994
    Likes Received:
    20
    Dont know if it was the CPU or the OS or a combination of the two, but my worst CPU experience by far was a 600mhz celeron desktop, running Windows ME, on dialup, and with a whopping 2mb of integrated video memory.
     
  10. Iron Woode

    Iron Woode Lifer

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 1999
    Messages:
    21,591
    Likes Received:
    6
    my first gaming rig was a SS7 system. K6-2 500, Epox MVP??-G-M board, 256 megs of sdram 133 and Voodoo 3 3000 video card. Was extremely stable and quite fast at the time.

    The next gaming rig was my Athlon 2500+ setup: Epox 8RDA+, 512 megs DDR333 and my old reliable GF2 GTS. I replaced that card with a 6800GS later on.

    worst cpu I have seen was my old cyrix 166+. P4 based celerons were also pretty crappy.

    I am happy with my current system: Phenom II x4 965 BE, Gigabyte GA-770TA-UD3, GTX260 sp216, 8gb DDR13333, SATA6mps 500gig hdd and Pioneer DVD burner.

    I don't really have a best cpu opinion.
     
  11. Centauri

    Centauri Golden Member

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2002
    Messages:
    1,532
    Likes Received:
    0
    Whatever happened to Epox? And for that matter, Abit, DFI, FIC...
     
  12. kowalabearhugs

    Joined:
    Sep 19, 2010
    Messages:
    185
    Likes Received:
    0
    Word. I have fond memories of Abit.
     
  13. bononos

    bononos Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2011
    Messages:
    3,198
    Likes Received:
    1
    I remembered the cyrix cpus (at least the early ones) had their L1 disabled by windows. And their oddball 75mhz fsb caused some problems with harddrives, oc'ing, stability etc. Their fpu was slow and they ran hot.
     
  14. Cerb

    Cerb Elite Member

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2000
    Messages:
    17,409
    Likes Received:
    0
    Commodization killed Epox, Abit, and DFI. FIC is still around, AFAIK. I'm sometimes surprised that Gigabyte than Biostar have held on.
     
    #89 Cerb, Nov 8, 2012
    Last edited: Nov 8, 2012
  15. Centauri

    Centauri Golden Member

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2002
    Messages:
    1,532
    Likes Received:
    0
    I remember swearing by Abit. And going through my order history on NewEgg over the past decade confirms it. :(
     
  16. Cerb

    Cerb Elite Member

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2000
    Messages:
    17,409
    Likes Received:
    0
    They were slow and hot, yes, but am I one of only three people on the planet that had stable and functional Cyrix CPUs from the Pentium era? Between myself, my father, and a family friend, we all had PR150+ and PR200+ CPUs, and aside from not being too fast, they worked just fine. I don't recall the chipset used, given how much time has passed, though, and that could have had a lot to do with it.
     
  17. Tsavo

    Tsavo Platinum Member

    Joined:
    Sep 29, 2009
    Messages:
    2,618
    Likes Received:
    0
    I had a 166 IIRC, and it was stable.
     
  18. pm

    pm Elite Member <br> Super Moderator<br>Mobile Device
    Super Moderator

    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2000
    Messages:
    7,397
    Likes Received:
    0
    My best was my Celeron 300A. I had a great time with that thing. Although I really like my Core i7 2600K right now too.

    My worst had to be a Cyrix 5x86. It had some incompatibilities in things - so not all software worked on it - and it was probably the most unstable, non-overclocked computer that I ever owned. I'm not bad-mouthing Cyrix in general - I had a 486DX4-100 that was great. But my Cyrix 5x86 was expensive and flaky and it was one of the few computers that I built that I was utterly unhappy with.
     
  19. Iron Woode

    Iron Woode Lifer

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 1999
    Messages:
    21,591
    Likes Received:
    6
    more than likely the chipset was either a 430VX or the TX.
     
  20. exar333

    exar333 Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2004
    Messages:
    8,503
    Likes Received:
    2
    REALLY miss my DFI boards. They were finicky as hell, but it was just a blast to eek every last fsb you could out of them. Huge loss...
     
  21. Arkaign

    Arkaign Lifer

    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2006
    Messages:
    19,305
    Likes Received:
    0
    Almost certainly VX lol. All of the cheap VX-based boards ran super hot on the VRMs, even more so with Cyrix chips in them.

    TX on the other hand, I probably installed a couple hundred TX-based systems with Pentium MMX and K6 CPUs, and those boards were fantastic.
     
  22. Abwx

    Abwx Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Apr 2, 2011
    Messages:
    7,740
    Likes Received:
    31
    What killed Abit was...Intel...

    Strong pressure from Intel retained majors MB manufacturers
    from launching officialy Athlon dedicated boards , Abit did even
    state that they wouldnt release such boards as they were bidding
    instead on the soon to be released Intel i820 chipset that would
    take advantage of Rambus Ram for the PIII platform.

    Alas for them , after million MBs were sold it became obvious
    that the chipset was buggy and millions cards had to be recalled.

    Where Intel had enough means to pay for its own MBs , Abit was left
    bleeding since they didnt have the growing Slot A market as a saving
    grace as was the case for ASUS.

    They soon embarked in the slot A bandwaggon , but it was too late.
     
  23. Emo

    Emo Senior member

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 1999
    Messages:
    349
    Likes Received:
    0
    Wow, lot's of memories from these posts! For some reason I've never had good luck with AMD chips. They worked fine but they had no overclocking headroom compared to Intel chips. Started with a 486dx66 chip, K6-2 300, skipped AMD for several generations when the Cel 300A/ Pentium II were untouchable. Went back to AMD XP 1600+ that was basically a dud, upgraded to an Athlon 64 3500+ that would only overclock by 100Mhz, kept that until the Core2 duo came out. Since then, went through E6400 (overclocked by 1.3Ghz), E8400 (overclocked by 1.2ghz) and currently on an i5-3570k overclocked by only 800Mhz. The last 3 systems are still in use at home, the rest of them I probably still have them in my storage room.
     
  24. Lonbjerg

    Lonbjerg Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2009
    Messages:
    4,426
    Likes Received:
    0
    Back in the day were I got a 2.4Ghz P4 Northwood with 1 GB of RDRAM(PC800) There was nothing that could touch it.

    The AMD Athlon XP 2000+ was no match..and DDR ram...PC 2100 (2.1 GB/s) vs RDRAM PC800 (3.2 GB/S) was really no match at all.

    It took like 6 months before my CPU was surpassed...more for PC3200 DDR to come.

    Paired with a Ti4600 that rig rocked..I think a lot of posters have failing memories...and just parrot older "memes"
     
  25. Insert_Nickname

    Insert_Nickname Platinum Member

    Joined:
    May 6, 2012
    Messages:
    2,622
    Likes Received:
    2
    No ones knocking the performance of the Northwood/i850. i850+RD-RAM was just so much more expensive. Don't even get me started on running a P4 on SDR-i845, that was horrible. At the time at least I thought that AMD was much better value... not least due to the venerable nForce2...

    Coincidently some of my closer family was running an AthlonXP 1800+ for close to 9(!) years. That's what I call value. Unfortunately the MB died in late 2010...