FX83/Pro200/512 vs HX83/200MMX: 3X66 Milennium 4M 3.62 ST34501W (Cheetah)

1024X768X16@85 Millennium 4M Adaptec AHA2940UW ST34501W (Cheetah UW) FAT32

MRBIOS 3.41 (60nS) Matrox BIOS 2.5 Matrox driver 3.62

This site has been accessed times since July 11th, 1997

Note: Marks shown by the third bar are for FX83 when the Cheetah was bare except for OSR2 and Winbench 97. In the fourth trace, the Cheetah has about 1G of data and applications. Evenso, the drop in disk performance is not neccessarily due to storage content. Winbench 97 is considerably variable in measuring disk performance. I can not answer whether this variability truely reflects lability of disk performance. An interesting aspect of graphics performance is that the Pro200/512 beats the P200MMX (3X75) in the Photoshop marks. I use Photoshop. Having both an HX83/200 and an FX83/Pro200 system, I much prefer the FX83 system despite that the benchmarks don't distinguish he Pro from the Pentium in the OSR2 configuration. Of course, the Pro crushes the Pentium on CPU32 scores. July 27th, 1997.

Table of Results , Current Results, BIOS Settings, FX83 Diary

Back to Benchmarking Index
This site is optimized for 1280X1024 resolution
Email: lae2@psu.edu
http: http://www.personal.psu.edu/lae2