PIII Gurus: 600/512 or 667/256?

I've got three slot 1 chips here.

A 600/512/100,
A 650/256/100,
A 667/256/133.

I've also got a S370 800/256/133, but since I haven't got a cooler, that's irrlelevant at this point.

So which chip will be faster? I assume the 600/512 will have a decent amount of speed since it's got half a meg of onboard, but the 667 has the extra 33Mhz...

The board and RAM are both 133 capable so that's not an issue at all.

[nukes]

I think the first one would do you the best (the one with 512k cache). If the board supports smaller FSB increments you could try pushing up the bus speed as well, but keep an eye on the PCI/AGP dividers.
It's only a 10% increase in clock speed, whereas its a 100% increase in cache. I could be wrong, but I'd choose the first one and clock it up a bit.

Thanks Nukes, I'll probably give that a try when I get a power supply for the machine.

Do these chips have a lock of the frequency, or just the multiplier?

[HeadBand]

i don't think its possible for a cpu to be fsb locked or else that would have happend a while ago

thats why intel's boards are not cabable of it but if the board is capable you should be able to bump the fsb up a little bit no problem

What's the #'s off your S370 800?

I've got an S370 800 w/ SL4MB I'd like to trade if yours has SL4CD Yours should be an 800EB as mine is.

And to answer your question, the 667/256 would outperform the 600/512 in benchmark tests.

What is the difference between the 4MB and 4CD? Mine is a 4CD.

Nothing really. I just have 3 w/ 4CD and 1 w/ 4MB. I'd like to have all 4 be 4CD to put in my two ABIT BP-6's.

http://processorfinder.intel.com/scripts/default.asp

[John Prophet]

hard to say whether the extra cache or extra speed would be best.

I did a lot of benches a while back with older celerons and P2's etc...the extra bus speed did make a lot of difference

you could try em both and break out sandra on them.

the thing to remember is the extra bus speed affects the ram as well....so you are getting more ram bandwidth etc with the extra 33mhz

That's the way I look at it.

The 256K is smaller, but it's going to fill/empty faster at 133MHz than the 512K running at 100MHz.

I'd go w/ the more MHz . . . I mean, it's not going to "hertz".

I kill me!

[John Prophet]

cache in with more hertz!!

(sounds like an old OJ renta-car commercial)