Slashdot Mirror


RIP Pentium II, 1997 - 2006

zorn writes "The Register has the scoop that 'this week Intel told its customers that it is to formally discontinue production of the Pentium II at 266, 333, 366 and 466MHz. Documentation seen by The Register reveals that you'll be able to continue ordering the part for a year, with the last trays leaving the chip giant's Pentium II warehouse on 1 June 2006.'"

418 comments

  1. Pentium II was still available for purchase? by Omniscientist · · Score: 0, Troll

    Not that I'd know, being loyal to AMD and all.

    1. Re:Pentium II was still available for purchase? by klui · · Score: 5, Informative

      Article states that many embedded systems still prefer to use it because of heat/power requirements.

    2. Re:Pentium II was still available for purchase? by bonzoesc · · Score: 4, Informative

      Old CPUs popular for embedded systems and the like are always made forever - their application might not need something fast and hot, the hardware might not support something new and fancy, and there might be certification issues when making a major part change.

    3. Re:Pentium II was still available for purchase? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      Not that I'd know, being loyal to AMD and all.

      Not that you'd know, being a fanboy and all.

    4. Re:Pentium II was still available for purchase? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The Register confirms Pentium II is dying.

    5. Re:Pentium II was still available for purchase? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's what I thought. Who would by a low-speed processor that nevertheless requires a fan in this day-and-age? If you want the computing power of one of these old processors, go with an early PPC-type chip so as to save on electricity and cooling-requirements. I guess original equipment manufacturers even fall for "brand"-names when making their purchasing decisions.

    6. Re:Pentium II was still available for purchase? by arivanov · · Score: 5, Informative

      The difference between Intel and AMD is that Intel has been successfull (or unfortunate depending on the point of view) to secure military and government contracts for its CPUs. Some of these contracts require at least 7 years worth of part availability for any component (some even more).

      In the past Intel has been successful in moving the technology for its old CPUs to licensees and relieving itself from the burden of maintaining manufacturing facilities. For example the 80286 lifetime during the last years of the contracts was fulfilled by Harris which managed to convince the military that their parts are acceptable replacement despite them using a different semiconductor technology.

      There are no full licensees for anything after i486 this is no longer the case and Intel has to ship all of the CPUs themselves. And methinks that with all the developments in CPUS even the circa 2K$ which people like US Gov pay for a Pentium 2 keeping the facilities makes it not worthwhile.

      --
      Baker's Law: Misery no longer loves company. Nowadays it insists on it
      http://www.sigsegv.cx/
    7. Re:Pentium II was still available for purchase? by SenatorOrrinHatch · · Score: 1

      Yeah I use AMD now too, but I had a PII and I suspect a lot of folks on this board did.

      But for a lot of people, the pentium 2 was the real start of PC's for EVERY person in America, not just the nerds and rich kids. It was the Model-T behind the IT boom.

      Requiescat in pace

      --
      The Christian in me says it's wrong, but the corrections officer in me says, 'I love to make a grown man piss himself.'
    8. Re:Pentium II was still available for purchase? by wayward_son · · Score: 2, Funny

      But if the application needs something slow and hot, what better choice than the Pentium II?

    9. Re:Pentium II was still available for purchase? by chris_eineke · · Score: 1

      I thought they used low-power, embedded ARM chips for these kind of applications?

      --
      "All you have to do is be fragile and grateful. So stay the underdog." Chuck Palahniuk, Choke
    10. Re:Pentium II was still available for purchase? by Nerftoe · · Score: 1, Interesting

      Article states that many embedded systems still prefer to use it because of heat/power requirements.

      Yep.. I can attest to that. I have a 400 Pentium II Dell Dimension that was shipped with only a heat sink. No fans on the CPU whatsover. It's quiet as can be. I use it for squid, mail, webserver, file server, you name it. Wow.. I guess it will be 7 years old in a few months.

    11. Re:Pentium II was still available for purchase? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      i know of a lot more people who got their first computer with pentium classic or celeron chips. the pentium 2 was more of a server-class chip back then. nowadaya of course there's no point to buy a celeron when you can get a more powerful amd chip for comparable price...
      but i bet there's still lots of servers out there with p2's. most of the ones in my shop have dual p2 mobos, and it's nice to know there will still be cpu's available for some time. they're maxed out on ram (1 GB) and have fast scsci disks. so far cpu speed hasn't been a problem, even on the lowly 400 MHz boxes.

    12. Re:Pentium II was still available for purchase? by bonzoesc · · Score: 2, Informative

      Sometimes. They also use 68k chips too. But if you're familiar with PC architecture, you do have the option to go with what you know.

    13. Re:Pentium II was still available for purchase? by bsd4me · · Score: 1

      New applications mostly use newer chips like the ARM, but legacy applications (and new orders of legacy products) still use older processors.

      --

      (S(SKK)(SKK))(S(SKK)(SKK))

    14. Re:Pentium II was still available for purchase? by stupidfoo · · Score: 5, Interesting

      We use Pentium 2s on some of our embedded systems, but by the time 2006 rolls around we'll be done using them.
      Our newer embedded systems use Pentium 3s.

      Actually, some of our basic systems (that we ship on a regular basis) still use plain old Pentiums running @ 200MHz. The processor is basically permanently attached to the board it comes on. It's amazing how small of heatsink it requires.

    15. Re:Pentium II was still available for purchase? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh my gawd, do you mean I can no longer order my lo-power-consumption 086's for the army of killer cyborg ants I was breeding ???

    16. Re:Pentium II was still available for purchase? by Reducer2001 · · Score: 2, Interesting
      I don't know about that. I remember running Office and playing Doom on my 486 DX2/66 with 16 MB of RAM and I knew plenty of Prodigy and Compuserve users running 386 SX's with 2 MB of RAM.

      Remember hand-configuring your config.sys and autoexec.bat to free up more expanded (or was it extended?) memory to play X-Wing, and then your dang Ad-lib soundcard would start working....sigh....the good old days.

      --
      When you get to hell -- tell 'em Itchy sent ya!
    17. Re:Pentium II was still available for purchase? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      What does an anecdote about a 7 year old desktop system have to do with the grandparent's point about modern embedded systems?

      Why does his post have to address the grandparent post? Cannot it not address the parent post? Is this some sort of Slashdot rule you made up? Jeez.

    18. Re:Pentium II was still available for purchase? by evilviper · · Score: 2, Interesting
      Article states that many embedded systems still prefer to use it because of heat/power requirements.

      But that's just not true... I explained this in good detail.
      --
      Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
    19. Re:Pentium II was still available for purchase? by networkBoy · · Score: 1

      My first PC was a hand me down XT when my dad bought a 286. I was so happy to get that damn thing and my own 1200 baud modem. . .
      Now I have a personal homogenous cluster of 14 PCs (x86 200MHz MMX) with a dual 166MHz setup as the head node. I realize this isn't fast but it was cheap and I can learn cluster computing on it quite nicely. My "normal" pc is an IBM T40.
      -nB

      --
      whois gawk date unzip strip find touch finger mount join nice man top fsck grep eject more yes exit umount sleep dump
    20. Re:Pentium II was still available for purchase? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I call bullshit: I just decommed my last P-II 266.
      Left alone and under no load, it would run close to 100C. It was goddamn hotplate.

      By the end, I was using two 80mm fans blowing on the heatsink and a third one sucking the air out the back. The hot air coming out the back was enough to heat the room it was in. I would have put water cooling on it IF I could have found a PII water kit.

      But it was cheaper to just trash the thing. Replaced it with an Athlon 64 system that runs MUCH cooler and much quicker.

    21. Re:Pentium II was still available for purchase? by silicon+not+in+the+v · · Score: 1

      I really got going on my parents' 486, and then got my own computer in 1995 when I was starting college. It was a Pentium 100 that cost almost $3,000. I ended up skipping the Pentium II generation completely because I kept that computer (overclocked to 133) going for the next 5 years until I graduated and got a full time job and was able to buy a P-III 600. That was still our fastest computer until just a few months ago, when I put together a computer from an Athlon 1GHz someone gave me. I do derive a sense of accomplishment from building decent computers with hardly any money into it.

      --
      We may experience some slight turbulence and then...explode. -Capt. Mal Reynolds
    22. Re:Pentium II was still available for purchase? by operagost · · Score: 1

      He did mean the parent post, not the grandparent. Regardless, the comment was relevant because the anecdote in question cited the two points of low noise and heat, simply not in an embedded implementation.

      --

      Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
    23. Re:Pentium II was still available for purchase? by operagost · · Score: 1

      Assuming that your PII even continued to run at 100C (which is at least 25 degrees above spec), it was still obviously misconfigured or defective. There is NO WAY that CPU should run over 60C, even with no heatsink. At 100C, you could throw water at the heatsink and it would dance like it was on a griddle. I would guess that you were accidentally overclocking it, perhaps by changing the FSB to 100. Perhaps you were overvolting it too. Even then, I'm amazed. All the money you spent on the fans and electricity to drive them should have been spent on a new CPU instead.

      --

      Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
    24. Re:Pentium II was still available for purchase? by Afrosheen · · Score: 2, Informative

      I've noticed an interesting trend with AMD lately. They're phasing out their XP chips and trying to get everyone to go to AMD64. The less than stellar Sempron is priced where the XP's used to be, and the lower-powered 64's are priced where the higher end XP's are.

      From an economic standpoint, they're encouraging you to buy an AMD64 chip for the same money a somewhat slower XP chip costs. If you want a cheaper XP-powered machine, you buy Sempron. I think they're going to stop building XP chips very soon.

    25. Re:Pentium II was still available for purchase? by lxt518052 · · Score: 2, Interesting
      According to the summary:
      The Register has the scoop that 'this week Intel told its customers that it is to formally discontinue production of the Pentium II at 266, 333, 366 and 466MHz.

      These PIIs all have a FSB of 66MHz. They are the first generation PII. Then Intel introduced 100MHz FSB and used them first on newer PIIs which run at 350, 400, 450MHz. They made some improvements over PII senior's terrible heat/power consumption issues. So your example doesn't fit very much into the case here.

      The article is simly wrong about PII's power consumption.

      --
      People who dislike China tend to mention Tiananmen Square a lot, but they always forget the Tank Man is also a Chinese.
    26. Re:Pentium II was still available for purchase? by kallisti · · Score: 1

      I think they're going to stop building XP chips very soon.

      According to a report I saw on Ars Technica, You may be right.

    27. Re:Pentium II was still available for purchase? by dgatwood · · Score: 2, Interesting
      My first thought was "Oh, the horror. Now, how will Dell be able to sell mid-1990s technology for $199.99," but then I realized that the Celeron still isn't being discontinued.... My bad... err... too bad.

      :-D

      --

      Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.

    28. Re:Pentium II was still available for purchase? by Pii · · Score: 1
      Ack... Mine was an 8088.

      Behold the splendor.

      --
      For those that would die defending it, Freedom
      has a sweet taste that the protected will never know.
    29. Re:Pentium II was still available for purchase? by ckaminski · · Score: 1

      From an economic standpoint, it only makes sense.

      High-end computing is coming in multicore now, AMD is going to need all that fab space churning out AMD64s, which performance-wise are better than the XP's.

      I'm not at all surprised. It's what Intel would have done had Itanium been able to run 32 bit software as fast as it's Pentium-III, Pentium-IV offerings.

    30. Re:Pentium II was still available for purchase? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Article states that many embedded systems still prefer to use it because of heat/power requirements.

      Other embedded systems use it because of the very long design cycles. High-end medical equipment, (MRIs, Ultrasounds, etc) can have 10-year product life cycles. It's nice that their processors are supported that long as well.

    31. Re:Pentium II was still available for purchase? by BlueCodeWarrior · · Score: 2, Interesting

      As someone who is browsing this article on a PII 266, I take offense at this comment. Haha. This computer has served me well, for the most part...can't beat $50 on eBay when it comes to a machine that's just used for mostly email and web browsing at college.

    32. Re:Pentium II was still available for purchase? by kyouteki · · Score: 1

      I would say the 486DX was the start, not the Pentium 2. Maybe the original Pentium class.

      --
      A slashdotter who didn't build his own computer is like a Jedi who didn't build his own lightsaber.
    33. Re:Pentium II was still available for purchase? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, Intel ripped its pants with the military (or, more specifically, defense contractors) over the i960. It was a great chip, and was used in a lot of designs - then Intel pulled the plug on it. Suddenly, a lot of programs (military contracts) were faced with DMS (diminishing supply) issues that they weren't expecting. They asked Intel to provide a solution, only to find that Intel had decided the military wasn't a good enough customer.

      Now, Intel can't get their foot in the door. Military contracts use Motorola processors almost exclusively. Of course, it doesn't hurt that they run substantially cooler, and with less power - but believe me, people around here haven't forgotten Intel's past.

    34. Re:Pentium II was still available for purchase? by The_Dougster · · Score: 1

      I used to run a fire breathing Pentium II monster. It had a Tyan Thunder 100 SMP motherboard with 2 Pentium-II 450's on it. That was a pretty nice system, while it wasn't all that fast (compared to my new Athlon-XP) it never slowed down much either. It had tons of cycles and it chugged away at a steady pace no matter what you threw at it. Unfortunately the motherboard kicked the bucket a couple years ago so I upgraded. It was a great system though.

      --
      Clickety Click ...
    35. Re:Pentium II was still available for purchase? by JesseL · · Score: 1

      Hell, one of our embedded systems uses two 4MHz Z80s (no joke!). We have a newer replacement design that uses an AMD SC520 (486@133MHz), but we still manufacture and sell a few hundred of the Z80 based systems per year.

      --
      "Prefiero morir de pie que vivir siempre arrodillado!"
    36. Re:Pentium II was still available for purchase? by The_Dougster · · Score: 1

      I actually had an 8086, which was kind of unusual back then. And it had EGA graphics! A full length card just covered with chips, lol.

      --
      Clickety Click ...
    37. Re:Pentium II was still available for purchase? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Pentium II (CISC architecture) did beat against Sparc (RISC architecture)!!!

      Pentium II was little-bit faster like DEC Alpha 21264!!!

      Pentium II was faster like Motorola 68060 was!!!

      open4free ©

    38. Re:Pentium II was still available for purchase? by Not+The+Real+Me · · Score: 1

      I agree.

      I use a PII 333 for my mail server. No CPU fan, just a large heat sink. The thing runs in the low 50C range. The original poster either overclocked the hell out of the CPU or really botched the setup of the motherboard.

  2. In related news... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

    In related news, global warming started to
    decline, as temperatures in Oregon
    returned to normal.

    1. Re:In related news... by snorklewacker · · Score: 1

      > In related news, global warming started to decline, as temperatures in Oregon returned to normal.

      The Pentium II did not run as hot as the Alpha, and not nearly as hot as today's CPU's. If not for thermal diode protection, today's CPU's will burn up in one second if you remove the heatsink. This was demonstrated graphically on old Socket A Athlons, which didn't have thermal protection. Poof. Instantly. My PII had a passive heatsink about as small as the one on the motherboard chipset, no fan, and it never even got more than warm.

      --
      I am no longer wasting my time with slashdot
    2. Re:In related news... by sigaar · · Score: 1

      That demo was deceptive. The AMD chips had the necessary functions to protect themselves provided the motherboard supports it. Problem was that no manufacturer bothered to include it, but it was available on a PCI card.

      If I'm not mistaken, then already AMD said that the warranty on your chip is void if it burns out and you weren't using a board that meets the AMD themal protection specs. If I remember correctly Tom's Hardware even had a scan of the relevant document on their site.

      Oh, and by the way, even a P-II core celeron will instantly burn out if you remove it's heatsink. It won't go up in smoke, it doesn't get hot enough, but it get's hot enough to break the CPU. I sold my old Celeron 500mhz chip to a dumbass who thought he could prove to an AMD fan buddy of his that the Intel CPU could take the heat. Guess what? It couldn't.

      --
      sigaar
    3. Re:In related news... by drsmithy · · Score: 1
      That demo was deceptive. The AMD chips had the necessary functions to protect themselves provided the motherboard supports it. Problem was that no manufacturer bothered to include it, but it was available on a PCI card.

      This is why Intel's design was better - it didn't rely on (famously lazy) motherboard manufacturers to include functionality to save customers' CPU investments.

    4. Re:In related news... by sigaar · · Score: 1

      No, it does rely on the motherboard/BIOS. The difference is that Intel makes motherboards too, and they set the standard. There are Pentium-III and Pentium-4 motherboards out there that don't have support for the thermal protection features, and I've seen both Pentium-III and Pentium-4 CPUs toast without even removing the heatsink.

      --
      sigaar
  3. Does that mean by stoolpigeon · · Score: 4, Funny

    they are going to be cheaper or more expensive?

    --
    It's hard to believe that's how Micronians are made. Why don't we see it right now by having you both kiss one another?
    1. Re:Does that mean by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      they are going to be cheaper or more expensive?

      Yes. Yes, they are.
    2. Re:Does that mean by AKnightCowboy · · Score: 1

      Neither. Nobody uses Pentium IIs anymore. If you need a low-priced, low power, low heat CPU you can just get a VIA C3 that'll run twice as fast.

  4. All good things end soon by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

    "Rest In Pentium"

    1. Re:All good things end soon by DarkMantle · · Score: 1

      Do you mean there's Rust In (your) Pentium?

      --
      DarkMantle I been bored, so I started a blog.
  5. is it bad... by feldkamp · · Score: 1, Funny

    That this made me a little sad?

    1. Re:is it bad... by bonzoesc · · Score: 1

      Does it make you sad when McDonalds stops making a particular sandwich, too?

    2. Re:is it bad... by acvh · · Score: 1

      well, when KrustyBurger stopped making the Ribwich my buzz was definitely harshed....

    3. Re:is it bad... by numbware · · Score: 1

      No its not. I feel sad too. But that's why I curl up with my 200mhz Pentium Pro (which has been in my closet for ages) and a hot cup of cocoa and try to calm myself... AH salty tears on the pins! NOOOOOOO!

      --
      I'm going to go create my own technology news site, with blackjack and hookers. You know what? Forget the news site.
    4. Re:is it bad... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > That this made me a little sad?

      No, it makes you extremely sad.

    5. Re:is it bad... by Masami+Eiri · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I, for one, was saddened when the Arch Deluxe was discontinued.

    6. Re:is it bad... by wo1verin3 · · Score: 1

      Actually I was quite saddened when the McRib went away... still hasn't come back here yet although certain parts of the US have it :(

    7. Re:is it bad... by jawtheshark · · Score: 1
      But that's why I curl up with my 200mhz Pentium Pro (which has been in my closet for ages) and a hot cup of cocoa and try to calm myself...

      And I thought that I was the only one that did that ;-)

      --
      Ahhh...the great dumpster continuum. Many a free computer will be found there. -- sowth (748135)
    8. Re:is it bad... by databyss · · Score: 1

      here here to the Arch Deluxe comrade.

      Was a tasty sandwich indeed!

      --
      Hmmm witty sig or funny sig? Maybe elitest techy sig!
    9. Re:is it bad... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Good stuff, but nothing will ever top the McDLT! The two-sided hot/cold styrofoam container was clutch!

    10. Re:is it bad... by DeathBunnyRanger · · Score: 1

      In San Diego we have the Mc Rib still, that think will never go away, as I understand the owner of it bought a huge freezer and stored enough to feed a orphanage of y2k children

    11. Re:is it bad... by SlamMan · · Score: 1

      That things was great! Made me think of the "rip" sandwich we'd get back in public school cafeterias.

      --
      Mod point free since 2001
    12. Re:is it bad... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's back in the Indy area for the holidays. I guess they offer it where they can get by with selling formed pressed pork squeezin's mixed up with sawdust and soaked in nitrates.

    13. Re:is it bad... by fimbulvetr · · Score: 1

      Oh crap...that makes three!
      Except, I have a quad, does that count x4?

    14. Re:is it bad... by Tim+Doran · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Parent is modded +1, Insightful.

      Ah, Slashdot... your moderation is always a source of entertainment...

    15. Re:is it bad... by rayde · · Score: 3, Interesting

      The McDonald's Arch Deluxe: a product before its time.
      Try here to make your own.

    16. Re:is it bad... by jawtheshark · · Score: 1
      To be honest: I have two PPro200. Not because I had a dual setup but because I thought I burned the one I had (fan stopped working and I didn't notice). I knew someone who also had a PPro200 and he gave it to me because he knew his motherboard was damaged. (And he didn't care about vintage hardware) Exchanged the chips and it seemed that my motherboard is fried too because the behaviour was exactly the same.

      So I have two PPro200 chips and no motherboard to use them. *sigh* You can find dual motherboards on ebay, but they never ship to Europe :-(

      --
      Ahhh...the great dumpster continuum. Many a free computer will be found there. -- sowth (748135)
    17. Re:is it bad... by javatips · · Score: 1

      I don't know for US, but in Canada, the McDLT returned as the McExtra... And it now comes fully assembled.

      You can even get extra cheese and beacon!

    18. Re:is it bad... by databyss · · Score: 1

      well that just ruins the whole point!

      If it's already assembled then the hot and cold parts will intermingle!

      --
      Hmmm witty sig or funny sig? Maybe elitest techy sig!
    19. Re:is it bad... by ckaminski · · Score: 1

      I'd send you the old Archistrat I used to have, but

      A) It weighed 120#'s (just the case and mobo) so I'd probably not ship it to Europe either.

      B) I threw it in the tip about a year ago (and nearly threw my back out doing it).

      <URL:http://www.byte.com/art/9510/img/506043g1.h tm >

    20. Re:is it bad... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What about the McDLT? I loved those. One side is hot, the other side is not!!! Sure, they were about 400 billion callories (per side), but man did they ever taste great! I remember offering a bite to the ambulance worker between shots of the defibrillator. I said 'it's getting cold here in the ambulance', he said 'after I'm done with you I can give the hot side a shot from the defib, and it'll warm up, you wait and see'. After taking it off the market, I hardly ever see the ambulance guy anymore. I think they might have put the poor E.M.T. out of work after they changed menus. Danm health nuts!

    21. Re:is it bad... by Solosoft · · Score: 1

      My Pentium Pro 200MHz (Dual). It has provided me with nothing but good computing. For jokes I put in a bit of money and modded it up. It primarly sits in my room and computes things or acts as my media player.

      I have some pictures of it too (They are 4.3 megapixel pictures)

      Picture in the Dark
      Picture with Light


      If I really wanted too I could put in PII Overdrives in here and have a PII 333MHz with 66MHz Bus and Full speed L2 Cache. For now this will let me slashdot, IRC and listen to tunes.

      Oh yeah it hosts www.solosoft.org pretty good too. The only issue I have with it is the extreme heat it pushes out. That was solved with some fans, the noise was solved by a hardcano 9 (OEM) in which I can independantly control the fans and turn them down when im in the room and don't feel like hearing it.

    22. Re:is it bad... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I was pretty annoyed when the discontinued that as well. The other day I saw the McDLT mentioned in a marketing book and I said to myself "Arrgh what were they thinking?!" It was probably the last time I really enjoyed something at McDonalds, and I have to say that I only eat there about once every 2 years now.

    23. Re:is it bad... by jawtheshark · · Score: 1
      Don't feel bad: I let a P-I 233MMX case be modded by an artist. It had to look like a weathered block of bronze:
      http://www.jawtheshark.com/~jorg/joris/mako1.jpg
      http://www.jawtheshark.com/~jorg/joris/mako2.jpg
      http://www.jawtheshark.com/~jorg/joris/mako3.jpg
      http://www.jawtheshark.com/~jorg/joris/mako4.jpg
      (The pics don't really do the case justice and please be gentle to my 128kbps upstream)

      He did a really fine job (and for free, don't you love artists in your family *grin*)

      I'm looking for a way to upgrade the content, so that its looks are matched at least halfway by its performance.

      --
      Ahhh...the great dumpster continuum. Many a free computer will be found there. -- sowth (748135)
    24. Re:is it bad... by lew3004 · · Score: 1

      I was sad when the ZX-81 went obsolete so don't take it too personal.

      --
      I still can't get the screen shots of Castle Wolfenstein for the Apple IIe out of my head.
  6. And my Netserver? by mazevedo · · Score: 4, Funny

    That means I can't buy parts for my old HP Netserver??

    --
    mazevedo
    1. Re:And my Netserver? by timts · · Score: 1

      or probably the part would be more expensive than a much faster server.

    2. Re:And my Netserver? by Breity · · Score: 0

      I LOVE my old netservers. i have 1 of the monsters running as... as... well, i know it has power, and im fairly certain it has an ip address. Its running win2k and boy is it stable. also have the matching external raid cabinet!

      --
      Blame it on ElGeeko De Generico [generic geek]
  7. Really warranted? by REBloomfield · · Score: 2, Insightful
    Does this really warrant a death knell? A processor that has been considered slow for the last few years is still going to be around for another two?

    I was really impressed when we first got our first 450Mhz, but god, does it seem like a dog now... I do remember thinking at the time, 1998 iirc, who the hell needs that much?!?

    1. Re:Really warranted? by Nohea · · Score: 1

      Hm, my home PC is a 400Mhz Celeron. Maybe i should make that AMD64 purchase, so i can play DOOM3 at more than 0.2 fps.

    2. Re:Really warranted? by DaHat · · Score: 5, Insightful

      For desktop use, yes, they are horribly slow by today's standards. But for simple embedded solutions, they can at times be considered overkill. Ex: When I get around to putting a mediapc under my drivers seat... I have no need or desire for a chip whose clock is measured in Ghz, simply because it's far more power (heat and draw) than I need to play mp3's and basic custom software.

    3. Re:Really warranted? by REBloomfield · · Score: 1

      i did notice up top that 450Mhz wasn't listed. That wasn't a PIII per chance was it?

    4. Re:Really warranted? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sure it is. Not everyone is building Wintel boxes with interchangable parts. Everybody who has been shipping custom designed embedded hardware using these processors is now has three choices:
      1 - discontinue the product
      2 - re-design the product with a more powerful processor that is overkill
      3 - Send Intel a butload of money so that they can buy enough processors to keep them in production for years to come.

    5. Re:Really warranted? by swordboy · · Score: 1

      I was really impressed when we first got our first 450Mhz, but god, does it seem like a dog now...

      Actually, a 450Mhz box is quite fast if you provide the ram and hard drive to make it competitive. I threw a 7200rpm hard drive and 512 megs of ram into a 350mhz box and it is quite usable with Windows XP (especially if I turn off the swap file).

      --

      Life is the leading cause of death in America.
    6. Re:Really warranted? by DavidTC · · Score: 1
      Well, the question is: Is the PIII really that much different from the PII? Don't they have basically identical everything?

      Sure, they probably run hotter, but you could always underclock them.

      --
      If corporations are people, aren't stockholders guilty of slavery?
    7. Re:Really warranted? by sporty · · Score: 1
      Depends on what you are doing it. As my web/mail/database/servlet server. Mine works fast enough.


      As my simulation server, it's crap. I run things on my 900mhz mac.

      --

      -
      ping -f 255.255.255.255 # if only

    8. Re:Really warranted? by Orgazmus · · Score: 1

      My dads old PII is a 450MHz chip, but they also made 450MHz PIII's

      --
      The system had the verbosity of HTML combined with all the readability of compiled assembly viewed as bitmap images
    9. Re:Really warranted? by eno2001 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      It's funny about that. Depending on your application and OS, it seems that there are different experiences of "slow". When I used to run Windows and I made the jump from a 486 DX2 66 to a Pentium 100, I thought the 486 was slow as hell. At work (where we use Windows as well) I've also seen the performance degradation in Windows boxes as the registry gets junked over time. So, a PC that started out "fast" eventually seems "slow" artificially unless you do a re-install. The other factor also is additional applications that you didn't originally run before. We had a batch of P3s here that were running Windows 2000 sufficiently fast. Eventually we had to break down and add a few very important and required utilities (DeepFreeze and Norton AV for example). Just the addition of Norton dragged those system's down to really horrible performance.

      Now, with my experience at home (where I run Linux pretty exclusively), my main X "application server" is a dual Pentium II with each proc running at 233. This thing is just about as fast as my P4 with hyperthreading running Windows XP Pro (for audio apps). It's been running for two years now and has had no performance degradation. At all. Period. The system is about 7 years old and it competes very nicely with a system that is only just barely a year old.

      I'd say that before anyone knocks a processor as being "slow" take a look at what your OS and applications are doing. If they've changed over time, theneither your OS is the issue or your application has changed dramatically in some way.

      --
      -"...bad old ideas look confusingly fresh when they are packaged as technology" - Jaron Lanier (Digital Maoism on Edge.o
    10. Re:Really warranted? by REBloomfield · · Score: 1

      now i'm curious what it was then..... i thought it was a II...

    11. Re:Really warranted? by gid · · Score: 1

      How may I ask did you turn off the swap file? I've tried doing this and XP was nice enough to turn it back on, informing me it has done it for performance reason or some other such bs. I even tried to make it a small fixed size, and XP resized it for me.

    12. Re:Really warranted? by Tux2000 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Do you remember the story of NASA searching i8086 CPUs for their space shuttles just two years ago? There are other stories, I remember some companies paying a lot of money for ancient Toshiba 386 laptops that was the only computer certified to "remote control" a certian pacemaker. A re-certification of a new system would have cost much more than buying a few 386 laptops at pentium-class prices.

      Some systems (not only NASA shuttles) are designed around a randomly selected CPU, and they run with software that needs the exact behaviour and timing of that special CPU. Say hello to the world of embedded systems.

      This message from intel is just a warning for designers of embedded systems that there will be a day when there is no spare P-II left.

      Tux2000

      --
      Denken hilft.
    13. Re:Really warranted? by bhtooefr · · Score: 4, Informative

      A P3 KATMAI is basically a process shrink of the P2, with SSE (and that damn Processor Serial Number) added. However, Coppermine and Tualatin ARE different.

      That said, there's not much difference between the Pentium Pro, the P2, and ANY of the P3 cores. The P-M is the first P6 (read: Pentium Pro-based) chip to have a design that's got more than small tweaks here and there.

    14. Re:Really warranted? by jawtheshark · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I agree... You can even do with less if you're just surfing. I'm posting this from a P-II 400Mhz that is used as a dial-up test machine at work. It has only 128Meg RAM and runs Firefox just fine on WinXP Pro (all visual effects disabled). The Task Manager indicates 170MB used, which means that it would run waaaay better with much more RAM, but it's good enough to do the testing of our webapp (and gives us some humility towards our customers with less snappy machines)

      --
      Ahhh...the great dumpster continuum. Many a free computer will be found there. -- sowth (748135)
    15. Re:Really warranted? by neko9 · · Score: 1

      my 350mhz p2 box is very quite usable in XP and even Mandrake. plays dvds, xvids, divxs, nicely runs playstation emus... long live p2! :-)

    16. Re:Really warranted? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      On my PII it takes only ~20 hours to compile OOo on it, but it's still one of my best computers;)

    17. Re:Really warranted? by RAMMS+EIN · · Score: 1

      ``I was really impressed when we first got our first 450Mhz, but god, does it seem like a dog now... I do remember thinking at the time, 1998 iirc, who the hell needs that much?!?''

      I still think that. I just got myself a VIA EPIA with a 533 MHz Samuel (which is probably slower than your 450 MHz PII), and I am very satisfied with the performance. It would even run KDE happily; not the lighteset software by any measure. And all of this silently and without consuming nearly as much power as todays GHz monsters.

      --
      Please correct me if I got my facts wrong.
    18. Re:Really warranted? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't know, let's put you on a life support machine designed around the PII but with a PIII kludged in and find out.

    19. Re:Really warranted? by klreed42 · · Score: 1

      Well, this _does_ warrant some scrutiny. Like you mentioned, the chip is hardly marketable now anyways, and it'll become completely unmarketable soon if it isn't already. So, Why is Intel spending 2 years to get rid of this outdated inventory? They don't want to take the hit (on their net income) now is why, they'll either depreciate it over the next two years slowly burning this Loss, or take a big hit in 2 years from now.

    20. Re:Really warranted? by Naffer · · Score: 1

      You know, I'm not sure about them playing Xvids and Divxs. I think it all depends on the bitrate. When my movies started losing sync was when I upgraded from Win95 (400Mhz P2) to WinXP (1.6A)

    21. Re:Really warranted? by malfunct · · Score: 1

      Maybe you don't have enough phsyical ram to make XP happy? I had a gig and when I turned off the swap file it never came back.

      --

      "You can now flame me, I am full of love,"

    22. Re:Really warranted? by bsd4me · · Score: 1

      It really has nothing to do with this. As others have pointed out, it is a warning for people who are still deploying systems with this chip, and for people doing maintenance on systems with this chip. In a lot of embedded and industial applications with long lifetimes, maintenance is a huge issue. There are companies who specialize in selling chips that are no longer produces (they buy up old stock and resell it).

      --

      (S(SKK)(SKK))(S(SKK)(SKK))

    23. Re:Really warranted? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      I was really impressed when we first got our first 450Mhz, but god, does it seem like a dog now...

      I realize you mean on the desktop, but my 400MHz Dell Optiplex (Pentium II) text-only proxy server at home running Fedora Core 1 would disagree. I probably use that little proxy server more than I use my main rig, since I also connect to the proxy from work. Perfectly stable, and plenty fast.

    24. Re:Really warranted? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A 450 Mhz CPU would still make an excellent Linux server, assuming you didn't want a GUI. Update your GUIstation and move this one to backend apps/storage.

    25. Re:Really warranted? by swordboy · · Score: 1

      How may I ask did you turn off the swap file?

      If you have enough RAM and lighten up the Windows memory footprint by disabling all of the crap, Windows won't turn it back on. I run most of my boxen with 512MB and no swap. Occasionally, I have to turn it on in order to do photo editing but that is rare. Check out Black Viper for more info on tweaking.

      --

      Life is the leading cause of death in America.
    26. Re:Really warranted? by fimbulvetr · · Score: 2, Informative

      The PIII has MMX2, which is one of the only significant differences between the 450Mhz PIII(Katmai) and the 450Mhz PII(Deschutes).
      Of course, there are other differences, but none significant enough to touch on.
      Use wcpuid if you have windows, or 'cat /proc/cpuinfo' in linux.

    27. Re:Really warranted? by rsmith-mac · · Score: 1

      Actually, Katmai wasn't a process shrink, it was just the addition of SSE and the SECC-2 cartridge format. It was still at 250nm, just like the last P2 core that preceded it(Deschutes). Coppermine included a process shrink down to 180nm though.

    28. Re:Really warranted? by freqres · · Score: 1

      I've got a Dell laptop here with an original Pentium 233MMX and 96Mb of ram running WinXPPro, Firefox, WinAmp and Office 2000 and it runs ok. Had to get a bigger HD for it (the original was 1G and WinXP ate up just about all of that). Even has a wireless card to connect to the internet. Real nice when I'm watching the kids in the backyard but can still do some web browsing and listen to some mp3's.

      --
      Rampant Ninja related crimes these days...Whitehouse is not the exception
    29. Re:Really warranted? by jawtheshark · · Score: 1

      I built a similar setup from spare parts for a friend of mine who had no cash for a new system (okay, no laptop). It runs Win2K and Office97 and surfs just fine. It all really depends on how high you standards are :-)

      --
      Ahhh...the great dumpster continuum. Many a free computer will be found there. -- sowth (748135)
    30. Re:Really warranted? by default+luser · · Score: 3, Interesting

      PPro (6th-generation, OOOE, Register renaming, fully pipelined ALUs/FPU, etc. .5 micron, 120-200 MHz) ->

      PII Klamath (Added MMX, better 16-bit performance, external cache, .35 micron shrink, 233-300MHz) ->

      PII Deschutes (.25 micron process shrink, added official 100MHz FSB, basis for Celerons, 300-450MHz) ->

      PIII Katmai (.25 micron optimization, added SSE, introduced official 133MHz FSB 450-650MHz) ->

      PIII Coppermine (.18 micron shrink, added on-die 256K cache on 256-bit bus, 500-1133 MHz) ->

      PIII Tualatin (.13 micron shrink, bumped cache to 512K, used new incompatible bus protocol, 600-1400 MHz)

      --

      Man is the animal that laughs.
      And occasionally whores for Karma.

    31. Re:Really warranted? by vasqzr · · Score: 1

      I run a Pentium II 450MHz, 512MB, 20GB.

      Slackware 9.1, Fluxbox...very fast with Mozilla, XMMS, etc etc

    32. Re:Really warranted? by bhtooefr · · Score: 1

      Shit, I thought Deschutes was .35...

      FWIW, Tualatin is mainly voltage changes, as far as I can tell. You can use an adaptor to use it on boards that don't support the new incompatible bus protocol.

      Also, I thought (for some reason) that PPro was .65...

    33. Re:Really warranted? by sigaar · · Score: 1

      They may be slow when compared on paper to today's beasts, but even a lowly P-II 233 can bee surprisingly responsive if you equip it well enough. One of my clients has P-II 233 with 640mb ram, a 7200rpm disc with 8mb cache, nVidia GeForce2 GTS graphics card, and proper hardware based sound and network controllers. Running WindowsXP with Office 2003 that machine doesn't make you wait during normal office use. Yeay, you won't use it for media apps or serious gaming, but for the vast majority of office users, that packs more punch than they could ever need.

      --
      sigaar
    34. Re:Really warranted? by Fareq · · Score: 1

      PII-450 did in fact exist.

      I just retired a machine that used it.

    35. Re:Really warranted? by east+coast · · Score: 1

      now has three choices:
      1 - discontinue the product
      2 - re-design the product with a more powerful processor that is overkill
      3 - Send Intel a butload of money so that they can buy enough processors to keep them in production for years to come.


      Option 4: Go to junk shows, garage sales and recyclers and pay about 20 bucks for the entire machine including processor. The fact is that there are so many of these PCs in existance today that the thought of not being able to find working 350 processors in ten years is doubtful at very best. How many people still have C=64s littering their homes?

      --
      Dedicated Cthulhu Cultist since 4523 BC.
    36. Re:Really warranted? by drew · · Score: 1

      over thanksgiving i was talking to a friend of mine who works on satellite components. a lot of the specialized pc hardware they use exists only on isa cards- he said the computer support guys there are constantly dumpster diving and scrounging around for 386's, 486's, and early pentiums, as anything newer usually only has one isa slot (if any).

      --
      If I don't put anything here, will anyone recognize me anymore?
    37. Re:Really warranted? by bhtooefr · · Score: 1

      There were two PPro cores? What chips used the .35 core?

    38. Re:Really warranted? by klui · · Score: 1

      I have a dual PII 450MHz at work that I use every day. It has a Matrox Millennium G200. It is definitely no P4, but most of my stuff is done on offsite servers, this is more than adequate. Well, until the corporate website folks started putting this stupid Flash-enabled doohicky on our header frame. What used to be adequate is now molasses slow whenever I open up IE (corporate-mandated). I don't have Flash installed on Firefox so that loads without a noticable delay. There's still a delay, but within my tolerance threshold.

    39. Re:Really warranted? by gid · · Score: 1

      Well I have a gig of ram and the theme junk and other various eye candy off, but it still bumped it up. Maybe with all the crap I run a gig wasn't enough, but that seems rather hard to believe. I know Jdeveloper is a hog, but a gig? I am running dual head as well, so that probably soaks up more ram, although I only had a solid color background.

      I'll have to give it another go. I looked over black viper's site, but really most of the services I can disable really don't use up that much ram.

    40. Re:Really warranted? by justins · · Score: 1
      Well, the question is: Is the PIII really that much different from the PII? Don't they have basically identical everything?
      Sure, they probably run hotter, but you could always underclock them.

      What you couldn't (necessarily) do would be to update the microcode (typically in the BIOS) of whatever devices you're looking to replace CPUs in. There were lots of PII motherboards that ended up supporting PIII CPUs, since they used voltage regulators that could adjust accordingly. But they invariably required BIOS updates (if they were bought early in their life cycle) so the system could load the microcode appropriate to the CPU. Many embedded devices won't have the facility for that kind of upgrade, I would think.

      You could sort of limp along without the appropriate microcode in some cases but hopefully you see the difficulty. You couldn't do it with a lot of confidence, and any devices that are still using a PII are either throwaways or devices that someone wants to have a lot of confidence in.
      --
      Now before I get modded down, I be to remind whoever might read this that what I am saying is FACT. - bogaboga
    41. Re:Really warranted? by cheide · · Score: 1

      Just to add another ditto, I'm still getting a lot of use out of my old PII-400, too.

      Running Slackware 10, it acts as a file server, mail filter, web server, general-Linux-fiddling box, and recently even as a MythTV PVR (albeit with hardware acceleration help via a WinTV card and XvMC).

    42. Re:Really warranted? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As you have 1 GB you should be able to do it by going to Control Panel >> System >> Advanced tab >> Performance Settings >> Advanced tab >> Virtual Memory change >> select "No paging file", click on "Set" (important!), then exit by clicking on the OK buttons... you might have to reboot the computer. (Windows XP requires 512 MB of RAM to disable the virtual memory).

    43. Re:Really warranted? by default+luser · · Score: 1

      Correction. The older P54C core was on a .5 micron process.

      The Pentium Pro started out on a .6 micron process (the 133 and 150MHz models) and moved to .35 micron (166, 180 and 200MHz).

      And yes, the bus protcol eventually prompted companies like Powerleap to release converters for GTL+ to AGTL+, but they were pretty slow out the door. For at least the first six months, the only way to get a Tualatin platform was to invest in an i815e.

      --

      Man is the animal that laughs.
      And occasionally whores for Karma.

    44. Re:Really warranted? by neko9 · · Score: 1

      it's all about configuration and 100mhz FSB :-) under WinXP ffdshow codec and Media Player Classic or VLC and under Mandrake xine. MPlayer is slow as hell. Geforce FX and Audigy helps too :-)

    45. Re:Really warranted? by kayen_telva · · Score: 1

      The system is about 7 years old and it competes very nicely with a system that is only just barely a year old.

      bulls^$#@t
      try encoding a cd to lame on both and compare
      or play a modern game
      or convert a dvd to divx
      /btw, same xp install for 2 1/2 years, no bitrot

    46. Re:Really warranted? by Matt_R · · Score: 1
      I have a HP Netserver LH3 with a pair of P2-450's sitting under the desk. It runs better than the P4-1.4GHz system I also have.
      # cat /proc/cpuinfo
      processor : 0
      vendor_id : GenuineIntel
      cpu family : 6
      model : 5
      model name : Pentium II (Deschutes)
      stepping : 2
      cpu MHz : 449.241
      cache size : 512 KB
    47. Re:Really warranted? by Reziac · · Score: 1

      I have Win95 setups that are 9 years old and no bitrot. There are freeware tools available to keep the registry in pristine condition, and no excuse not to use 'em. I use Toniarts Easycleaner: http://personal.inet.fi/business/toniarts/

      --
      ~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
    48. Re:Really warranted? by Reziac · · Score: 1

      "I've also seen the performance degradation in Windows boxes as the registry gets junked over time. So, a PC that started out "fast" eventually seems "slow" artificially unless you do a re-install."

      Actually, this is a symptom of neglect. To prevent the "old age slows", do the following religiously once a week:

      Kill tempfiles, defrag, and scrub the registry with Toniarts Easycleaner (freeware): http://personal.inet.fi/business/toniarts/

      That's all there is to it. This will also cure the majority of stability issues that aren't directly caused by iffy hardware, bad drivers, or (on Win9*) applications with resource leaks.

      As to installing new applications that are too much for old hardware, or that expect Win2K/XP and therefore don't bother to clean up memory after themselves, there I can't help you :) But a good rule of thumb is to not install any application that is more than 4 years newer than the hardware and/or OS it's expected to run on, because chances are it won't be well-behaved on the older OS, or it will overwhelm the hardware of that previous era.

      --
      ~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
    49. Re:Really warranted? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The embedded PII does *not* use a slot 1 cartridge design, so it's not interchangeable with the desktop version. You can't buy a $2 PII at a swap meet and plug it into a box designed for the embedded PII.

      Likewise, the mobile version of the PII, which is actually an MCM.

  8. Cute, but... by syrinx · · Score: 5, Informative

    from the still-waiting-on-my-sexium dept.

    "Pent" is based on the Greek prefix, which include "tetra", "penta", "hexa", and "hepta". "Sex" is from Latin, which include "quad(ri)" "quint" (or "quinque"), "sexa" and "septa".

    So, the logical next step after Pentium would be Hexium, not Sexium.

    --
    Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum sonatur.
    1. Re:Cute, but... by nomadic · · Score: 5, Funny

      Come on, they're slashdot editors, they have trouble enough with English. Don't torment them with Latin or Greek...

    2. Re:Cute, but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But Hexium, isn't nearly as funny SEXium! (in a very immature sort of way)

    3. Re:Cute, but... by virid · · Score: 1

      Why is that the "next logical step"? Even with a Hexium, he would "still [be] waiting on [his] sexium".

      Perhaps in this case the next logical step to having read that statement was to LAUGH.

      Nevertheless, I'm busting your chops. Your post was quite informational.

      --
      "The world only exists in your eyes. You can make it as big or as small as you want." - F Scott Fitzgerald
    4. Re:Cute, but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So, the logical next step after Pentium would be Hexium, not Sexium.

      That joke is about 15 years old now...

    5. Re:Cute, but... by wed128 · · Score: 1

      I do think it's wierd that rather than calling the first i686 chips hexium, they called them P-II. Why? to prevent confusion? and why arent PIII's i786 and P4's i886? i mean, why rename more i686s? am I missing something?

    6. Re:Cute, but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Gee, maybe because the Pentium name has much better name recognition than Hexium?

    7. Re:Cute, but... by captnitro · · Score: 2, Informative

      The (rough) order is like this, not entirely chronological, but you get a feel for the scheme:

      4004
      4040
      8008
      8080
      8085
      8086
      80186
      80188
      80286
      80386
      80486
      Pentium
      Pentium Pro
      Pentium II ...

      If you're wondering why we're still using a line of naming from 1971, just think about how Intel makes chips -- just add voltage!

    8. Re:Cute, but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I thought the first i686s were Pentium Pros @ 180 Mhz...

    9. Re:Cute, but... by blair1q · · Score: 1

      I'm still waiting for planux.

    10. Re:Cute, but... by holzp · · Score: 0

      ...not to mention their troubles with "Sex"

    11. Re:Cute, but... by shawn(at)fsu · · Score: 1

      just add voltage!
      It's amazing how many things have been achived by doing just that. Didn't they use electricty do get the cells going when they cloned Dolly?

      I think voltage is more usfull than ductape(sp?)

      --
      500 dollar reward for tip(s) leading to the arrest of the person(s) who stole my sig.
    12. Re:Cute, but... by snorklewacker · · Score: 1

      I do think it's wierd that rather than calling the first i686 chips hexium, they called them P-II. Why? to prevent confusion? and why arent PIII's i786 and P4's i886? i mean, why rename more i686s? am I missing something?

      Because Pentium was chosen as a brand name, and yes it was to play on the "five", since customers had previously gotten conditioned to want the 286, 386, then 486. None of those numbers had trademark protection, and AMD was producing some crappy knockoffs (wasn't really til the Duron that AMD pulled ahead). It's a brand, apropos of a line of processors, so you don't change the brand unless you're promoting a new line, such as "high end" (Xeon) and "budget" (Celeron). Intel has Xeon/Pentium/Celeron, and AMD looks like they've settled on Opteron/Athlon/Sempron.

      As for why the model numbers don't change, the PPro, P2, and P3 are largely the same design. The P4 probably deserved a different model number, but Intel prefers to use the capability bits now (for querying for MMX, SSE, SSE2, etc) instead of the model number.

      --
      I am no longer wasting my time with slashdot
    13. Re:Cute, but... by Bazouel · · Score: 0

      No wonder French are so good at "Sex".

      *ducks*

      --
      Intelligence shared is intelligence squared.
    14. Re:Cute, but... by Sebastopol · · Score: 1


      Too much brand-equity in Pentium to change it. Branding is a tricky bird, once you've spent a trillion dollars of 14 years beating the name into a generation of brains, you don't change it.

      Plus Hexium sounded too Satanic. I read somewhere that AMD and Intel rounded their 666 MHz processors to 667 becuase of New Testament mythology. Kinda like the "no 13th floor in hotels" nonsense.

      --
      https://www.accountkiller.com/removal-requested
    15. Re:Cute, but... by null-sRc · · Score: 1

      "Sex" is from Latin, which include "quad(ri)"

      so porn servers use sex-cpu servers? :)

      --
      -judging another only defines yourself
    16. Re:Cute, but... by FuzzyBad-Mofo · · Score: 1

      Or up-tempo singing and dancing..

    17. Re:Cute, but... by hawkeyeMI · · Score: 2, Informative

      that, and the chips ran at 666.66 MHz, so if you want whole numbers it properly rounds to 667. You didn't see this with 333 MHz because it's 333.33, which rounds down.

      --
      Error 404 - Sig Not Found
    18. Re:Cute, but... by Cynikal · · Score: 1

      sure but don't tell me you wouldn't run out and buy the first chip code named Sexium, and then slap a big old sticker on your case saying "Sex inside".

    19. Re:Cute, but... by Sebastopol · · Score: 1


      Well too bad they released 266 and 166 MHz parts, both which round to 267 and 167.

      What's your explanation now? ;-)

      --
      https://www.accountkiller.com/removal-requested
    20. Re:Cute, but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Whatever!

    21. Re:Cute, but... by ionpro · · Score: 1

      AMDs weren't exactly crappy knock offs. In fact, if you bought a 386 or early 486 from Intel, there was a chance that it was made by AMD, since Intel licensed some production from them for those lines of chips. Now, granted, when AMD (and Cyrix) went retail, their chips (while still not crappy) had well overinflated performance ratings.

    22. Re:Cute, but... by hawkeyeMI · · Score: 1

      good point - my mistake!

      --
      Error 404 - Sig Not Found
    23. Re:Cute, but... by drew · · Score: 1

      i remember there was also an 8088 in there somewhere. i used them in my high school programming classes. (no, i'm not really that old, my school was just really cheap when it came to computers. the first pentiums were already out when i took that class.)

      as to the parent's question, the first i686 was actaully the pentium pro. The PII was really just the addition of the MMX instructions to the PPro. i suppose i would be oversimplifying things to say that intel has kept the i686 label because they haven't really changed anything since then other than the speed, but i think that is the last time they changed the core instruction set.

      --
      If I don't put anything here, will anyone recognize me anymore?
    24. Re:Cute, but... by Hugonz · · Score: 1

      Looks kinda like Gray Code =)

    25. Re:Cute, but... by afidel · · Score: 1

      Actually they called it the PENTIUM 2 or PENTIUM II, the reason was that they had several billion in marketing behind the Pentium brand by that point and since the Pentium name was covered by copyright there was little incentive to go away from it. Btw P-II is just geek shorthand =)

      --
      There are 4 boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order. Starting now.
    26. Re:Cute, but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      esp since Taco got married a couple of years ago. ;-)

    27. Re:Cute, but... by nutbar · · Score: 1
      While that would be an intelligent assumption, it is factually incorrect.

      I (still) use a P3 667 at home. It reports itself as 666.46Mhz, not 666.66Mhz. Intel did indeed rename the 666 to a 667 for marketing purposes. Look at the 166, 266, ... , 866 etc for confirmation.

      Years ago I installed a BIOS patch that's only change was to "correct" the displaying of 666 MHz in the system summary screen to 667 MHz. Can't have people thinking Intel is the beast!

    28. Re:Cute, but... by The+Green+Skeleton · · Score: 1
      Come on, they're slashdot editors, they have trouble enough with English. Don't torment them with Latin or Greek...
      Or sex...
    29. Re:Cute, but... by mvdw · · Score: 1

      The CPU clock in your computer will very likely not be exactly 666.66MHz, for the simple reason that crystals drift with temperature and age. So my 667MHz PIII will be a (ever-so) slightly differnent speed to your 667MHz PIII.

    30. Re:Cute, but... by mvdw · · Score: 1

      The 8088 was a version of the 8086 with an 8-bit external bus, while being 16-bit inside. It came after the 8086, and was used in the original IBM PC, most likely due to the cheaper cost of making peripherals to interface to the 8-bit bus.

      As an aside, I think it's fine for high-schoolers to use something other than the latest-and-greatest to learn on; The idea behind teaching computers in school is to teach principles, not specifics.

    31. Re:Cute, but... by Ph33r+th3+g(O)at · · Score: 1

      Nerd :).

      --
      I too have felt the cold finger of injustice.
    32. Re:Cute, but... by drew · · Score: 1

      As an aside, I think it's fine for high-schoolers to use something other than the latest-and-greatest to learn on; The idea behind teaching computers in school is to teach principles, not specifics.

      I agree in general, but there is a limit beyond which being too far behind the times can cause problems.

      My first programming class in high school was in 1994. The computers were 8088's running MS-DOS 3.3, and we learned to program in GWBasic, complete with line numbers and GOTO's. So, while I learned some of the very basic concepts of programming (conditional logic, loops) I also learned a lot of poor practices that I had to unlearn later on- GO TO statements, lack of any kind of functional modules, etc...

      (although i must admit, when I eventually got to my assembly programming classes in college, everything made a lot more sense)

      --
      If I don't put anything here, will anyone recognize me anymore?
  9. PII by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That's news to me. I thought the PII could still be purchased because retailers still had some floating around in their warehouses. I didn't realize the PII was still profitable for Intell. Are they still making it on 180nm? 130nm?

    1. Re:PII by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > I didn't realize the PII was still profitable for Intell.

      It's not, thats the point of this article! dumbass.

    2. Re:PII by bhtooefr · · Score: 1

      250 or 350nm, I'm sure (depends on the core). They have to do some redesigning (not much, though, but it does cost money) to do a process shrink, so I don't think they'd bother.

  10. In other news.... by Geek_3.3 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    naah, too easy.

    On a real note, how many PII's *DID* Intel produce in the past couple of years?

    Gah, this was about as surprising to me as when that /. article on Sony phasing out Betamax...

    1. Re:In other news.... by jCaT · · Score: 1

      Gah, this was about as surprising to me as when that /. article on Sony phasing out Betamax...

      That's a strikingly similar comparison, as both products are still being used by businesses long after they had been abandoned by consumers. It's getting harder to find betamax stuff these days, but up until a few years ago it was THE thing to be using for a lot of professional video editing. It's almost been completely usurped by digital technologies.

    2. Re:In other news.... by bsd4me · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Betamax is the consumer version, and is pretty much dead. The professional version, Betacam SP, is still used, and in some places, it is still the most popular video format. The main reason is that it works well, the Sony Beta decks will not die, the newer professional digital decks are really expensive.

      --

      (S(SKK)(SKK))(S(SKK)(SKK))

  11. You mean people still buy Pentium 2s? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Computer prices don't follow rational pricing. You would think if you could buy a P4 2GHz for 75 bucks that a P2 333MHz would be like, 5 bucks, if that. But chances are it's probably $35, if not more.

    Why in the Lord's name would you buy such outdated crap at such a high price? Reminds me of my first PC when the HDD drive died. It was 1 gig back in the days when BIOS limitations on the board would allow about 1.8 gigs, I believe. At the time, I couldn't even FIND a 1 gig HDD in retailers. I looked online, and the 1 gig HDDs were about 20% more expensive than the 6 gigs they had out.

    We bought a new PC shortly there after.

    Let's weed out the technological throwbacks, alright?

    1. Re:You mean people still buy Pentium 2s? by bhtooefr · · Score: 2, Interesting

      How 'bout http://www.dumpinggoods.com/dumpinggoods/itemdesc. asp?CartId=8-ACCWARE-321007DVDKM267&ic=CP-INT-0004 &cc=&tpc=?

      It's $3.99, and as far as I can tell, it's new (with heatsink, even ;-))

      If you just want a 233MHz chip (to help your collection, maybe? Anand found that in low resolutions, in many games (back in the day), the 233MHz PMMX beat the 266MHz P2), that's free+S&H.

    2. Re:You mean people still buy Pentium 2s? by DavidLeblond · · Score: 1

      If I had to compile this program using a 386 I'd shoot myself. It takes 10 minutes to compile on a 2 GHz machine as it is.

      "Hello world" != real work :P

    3. Re:You mean people still buy Pentium 2s? by cmiller173 · · Score: 1

      Thanks for the link, I might just give my 6 year old daughter's computer a speed boost. That barbie "princess & the pauper" game will really run smoothly now.

      I AM serious....my little girls PC is a 233mHz PII, $4 for a 100mHz speed jump, why not.

    4. Re:You mean people still buy Pentium 2s? by Lonewolf666 · · Score: 1

      I don't think that anyone buys them for use in new computers anymore. Except maybe small-series special hardware, where redesigning for another processor would be too expensive.
      So most of those being sold will be spare parts for some expensive server, and they might even be MORE expensive than, say, a modern celeron. Because the customers cannot switch easily to another product.

      --
      C - the footgun of programming languages
    5. Re:You mean people still buy Pentium 2s? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >"Hello world" != real work :P

      So THAT's why they fired me.

    6. Re:You mean people still buy Pentium 2s? by InfiniteWisdom · · Score: 1

      Computing >> desktops+laptops

    7. Re:You mean people still buy Pentium 2s? by kfg · · Score: 1

      Let's weed out the technological throwbacks, alright?

      I don't need an Apache attack helicopter to go to the corner store, and you can have my Z80s when you pry them from my cold, dead motherboards.

      Sometimes technological "throwbacks" are simply the right tool for the job and commercial availability and/or price is a seperate issue from applicability.

      The price of a cpu is often determined by marketing concerns (we want people to buy the latest and greatest stuff, so we keep the price high on the older stuff, because the people who don't need them will then buy the new stuff and the people who need the old stuff will pay the exorbitant price). This has nothing to do with what they could be sold for and still turn a profit on the piece.

      All that said, I'm not sure where the PII would fit into that. What we really need are 486 and PII bs. The old chips redsigned with modern manufacturing techniques and improvements. That would be sweet.

      It'll also happen when monkeys fly out of my butt. In the meantime, there's always VIA. The Asian manufacturers are going to eat that market alive while Intel focuses on high end flash.

      There may come a day when they rue that decision.

      KFG

      KFG

    8. Re:You mean people still buy Pentium 2s? by RedK · · Score: 1

      Yeah, what crap. A client just bought a new "computer" using a PII 433. My cost was about 2500$ and I have to sell it to him for MSRP of 4000$. Look at the specs reported by the OS :

      Hardware: PIX-515E, 32 MB RAM, CPU Pentium II 433 MHz
      Flash E28F128J3 @ 0x300, 16MB
      BIOS Flash AM29F400B @ 0xfffd8000, 32KB

      Oh.. That's right. I forgot to mention what it was. See, embedded systems still use those chips, because frankly, that's all they need to be able to do their intended functions. A Cisco PIX 515E is no slouch either, being capable of something like 177 mbps of 3DES or AES throughput (off the top of my head).

      The bottom of the line Cisco PIX, the 501, uses a AMD processor. Try to guess which. K6-2 ? Nope.. K6 ? neither.. K5 ? Close... it's actually the 586-DX4 133 mhz. Remember those ? That takes me back to PCs made about 1996. And a PIX 501 costs me about 400$ for a 10 user (10 translated ips) version. The MSRP is of course rather inflated. Here's its hardware output :

      Hardware: PIX-501, 16 MB RAM, CPU Am5x86 133 MHz
      Flash E28F640J3 @ 0x3000000, 8MB
      BIOS Flash E28F640J3 @ 0xfffd8000, 128KB
      Just for fun, go check out the processor specs on the top of the line PIX 535. You'll be rather surprised what 35,000$ gets you. Here's a hint, it's not calculated using GHZ. So there is still very good demand for this "old" technology. Let's not always assume Intel CPUs are used just for the latest wizz-bang Desktops or Laptops. If Cisco had to redesign their hardware each 6 months, we'd probably pay even more than the current inflated prices we have right now.
      --
      "Not to mention all the idiots who use words like boxen."
      Anonymous Coward on Monday August 04, @06:49PM
    9. Re:You mean people still buy Pentium 2s? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wow, maybe the value of my factory sealed Pentium MMX 200 MHz will rise even more!

    10. Re:You mean people still buy Pentium 2s? by mnmn · · Score: 1

      The pentiumII was a better chip than somewhere in the middle of Pentium1 and PentiumIII. The Spec Int ratings (and other ratings on the spec.org) was comparable to the PentiumIII, makes me wonder what is the PentiumIII beside having a higher clock.

      Compared to the Pentium1, it was leagues ahead, similar to the Pentium's lead over the 486. Originally sold as the Pentiumpro (still looking for one as a collectors item), then as PentiumII with SSE, better clock, and weird weird packaging which AMD copied, but never took off for x86 CPUs. I still dont get the PLASTIC casing around the riser card.... bad circulation, and who will ever be impressed with ads inside the case?!?

      The PentiumII-PentiumIII streak (very similar chips) began with Intel in the lead, and ended with a defeat by the Athlon. It ended really because Intel wanted a shallow pipeline and higher clock numbers... else we'd be running only a much higher clock version of the same chip now.

      Somehow I dont feel the P4 will last as long. Intel needs to copy Athlon64 and quick.

      --
      "Give orange me give eat orange me eat orange give me eat orange give me you." -Nim Chimpsky
    11. Re:You mean people still buy Pentium 2s? by nmx · · Score: 1

      That barbie "princess & the pauper" game will really run smoothly now.

      "I'm just like you"
      "You're just like me"
      "Yes I am a girl like you"

      God, make that commercial STOP! :-(

      --
      "Well kids, you tried your best, and you failed. The lesson is, never try."
  12. Re:Does anyone know... by syrinx · · Score: 1

    The author of TFA knows:

    That the part has held on for so long, past the introduction of the Pentium III and the P4, is a sign of its appeal to manufacturers of embedded systems for which high clock speeds and commensurately high power consumption and heat dissipation figures are a problem.

    --
    Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum sonatur.
  13. one down! by koi88 · · Score: 1


    Does that mean AMD has won?

    --

    I don't need a signature.
    1. Re:one down! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No it means you are a moron.

    2. Re:one down! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No it means you are a moron.

      Don't you mean a duron(tm)?

  14. Re:Does anyone know... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's still used in embedded applications and where specified in Military/Government contracts.

  15. Re:Does anyone know... by noprunesmoothie · · Score: 1

    I imagine large institutes with many of the same old p2 pc's that have older mobo's that can't support faster processors.

  16. Pentium II lives on as a military processor. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The civilian version of Pentium II has been discontinued, but the military version lives on. Remember the 486? Supposedly, it is not being sold as a commercial processor, but the military version is alive and well. Gao Zhan was caught in trying to buy and to transfer several radiation-hardened 486 chips to Beijing. By the way, Gao Zhan is a permanent resident (i.e. green card holder) of the USA.

    1. Re:Pentium II lives on as a military processor. by bhtooefr · · Score: 2, Interesting

      It's still being sold as an Intel Embedded Legacy processor, along with the 186 (which was really only used in embedded environments) and the 386. In fact, you can buy a whole wafer of any of their embedded legacy chips if you want to do your own packaging.

    2. Re:Pentium II lives on as a military processor. by pegr · · Score: 1

      In fact, you can buy a whole wafer of any of their embedded legacy chips if you want to do your own packaging.

      Packaging, heck, I'd hang it on my wall! They don't even have to work!

      Reminds me of my favorite geek object du art I've ever seen. Some PHB from years back actually had an IBM PC motherboard circuit board from back in the day. No parts, just the board. Way cool...

    3. Re:Pentium II lives on as a military processor. by doodlelogic · · Score: 1

      >>the 186 (which was really only used in embedded environments)

      Actually RM in the UK used 186s in their range of all purpose school computers. Cheaper than the 286s at the time, but couldn't run Windows.

    4. Re:Pentium II lives on as a military processor. by bhtooefr · · Score: 1

      They were PRIMARILY used in embedded environments. I already said that there WERE 186 PCs (I know Tandy made one, too), just they weren't common.

      Oh, and who said a pre-286 couldn't run Windows? 3.0 runs on an 8088...

    5. Re:Pentium II lives on as a military processor. by ckaminski · · Score: 2, Funny

      > Oh, and who said a pre-286 couldn't run Windows? 3.0 runs on an 8088...

      Oh the Horror! One application at a time. :-)

    6. Re:Pentium II lives on as a military processor. by bhtooefr · · Score: 1

      I'm pretty sure Windows 3.0 could multitask on an 8088. I guess I'll have to fire up Virtual PC, find a copy of DOS 6.22 and Windows 3.0 online, and take it for a spin with "win /r", and then find some Windows 3.0 stuff that will use the processor (maybe find VB1.0, and whip up an app that says a number of iterations in a loop, then calculate the number of iterations in one second, and (with it in view, so I can see) switch to Program Manager). Basically, I need something that quite obviously changes constantly, and will run in Windows 3.0 Real Mode.

    7. Re:Pentium II lives on as a military processor. by YetAnotherAnonymousC · · Score: 1

      I think you're thinking of multitasking made-for-Windows programs in real mode on pre-286 chips (which you could do even in windows 1.0 - but no window overlaps until 2.x), and the other gentleman is thinking of multitasking multiple non-Windows-(i.e., DOS-)programs. You couldn't multitask multiple DOS programs through Windows on any pre-286 chip.

    8. Re:Pentium II lives on as a military processor. by drsmithy · · Score: 1

      Windows 3.0 multitasked at least as well (badly ?) as MacOS up until OS X :).

    9. Re:Pentium II lives on as a military processor. by The_Dougster · · Score: 1

      It had a primitive multitasker somewhat like DesqView, but not as good. If you loaded it on a 386 or better it could multitask better. I seem to remember some kind of "386 Enhanced" thingy in the control panel.

      --
      Clickety Click ...
    10. Re:Pentium II lives on as a military processor. by lga · · Score: 1

      My school had a network of RM Nimbus 80186 machines which could run MS Windows 1.0 with Pagemaker. Still got the copy I took somewhere...

    11. Re:Pentium II lives on as a military processor. by G-funk · · Score: 1

      Gah. How memories fade.

      Windows 95, like mac OS 9 does not do real multitasking. It's all cooperative, requiring programs to voluntarily give up a slice of time. This of course works equally well on any cpu that runs windows, but faster on a 386 than a 286 or an 88

      --
      Send lawyers, guns, and money!
    12. Re:Pentium II lives on as a military processor. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Forgot the extrans.... d0h... that should read: "Windows < 95, like mac OS < 9"

    13. Re:Pentium II lives on as a military processor. by LWATCDR · · Score: 1

      The Tandy 2000 used the 186 as well. It was even a much better machine than IBM PC. However like the Zenith Z-100 which was also better then the PC it was not compatable with the PC so they lost.

      --
      See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
    14. Re:Pentium II lives on as a military processor. by bhtooefr · · Score: 1

      386 Enhanced basically allowed Virtual Memory and DOS multitasking (SUCKY DOS multitasking, but it was there).

  17. change back to 80686 then? by peter303 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Marketers find that more than five generations in series can make your product seem stale (especially if it is really getting stale). So there is often a name/numbering change.

    I considered the original Pentium to be like a x576, the PII a x686, PIV a x886, then lost count.

    1. Re:change back to 80686 then? by JollyFinn · · Score: 1

      So why not rename it 80666 ;)

      --
      Emacs is good operating system, but it has one flaw: Its text editor could be better.
    2. Re:change back to 80686 then? by Gorath99 · · Score: 2, Informative
      So why not rename it 80666 ;)

      I know it's a joke, but there's a reason why they won't go back to numbers (with or without biblical connotations). IIRC Intel tried to sue AMD for producing a chip they called a 486, but they were told by the judge that they couldn't trademark a number. That's why they called their next chip a Pentium instead of a 80586.
    3. Re:change back to 80686 then? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Marketers find that more than five generations in series can make your product seem stale (especially if it is really getting stale). So there is often a name/numbering change.

      Actually, the name change to pentium was due to the fact that you can't trademark a number. Intel wasn't able to prevent people from releasing processors with 486 designations, so they named their next chip the pentium.

    4. Re:change back to 80686 then? by nuintari · · Score: 1

      They switched from a numbering system to a name based system when they found they couldn't copyright the numbers. So when AMD and other clone makers appeared marketing "486's", they had to find a way to stand apart.

      Technically, the Pentium is an i586, the P2 and so on are all i686 cores, with various levels of additional stuff thrown in that haven't warrented a major version change. When you build software for an ix86 platform, you target i386, or i686. (Or, be mandrake and build for i586 for some reason unbeknownst to me) There is no i786, or i886, nor will their likely ever be one, as Intel is probably looking to retire to x86 core in favor of IA64. Collectively, the x86 family is sometimes reffered to as IA-32, which is strange because Intel has other 32 bit, non-x86 archs under its belt as well. Sure you could call a Pentium 3 an i786, but the compiler would think you were nuts if you tried to build for that platform.

      Also of interest, sometime between 80386 and i486, they dropped the 80 off of the front. Its pretty much gone now, not sure why. but I'll wager it was an attempt to copyright the label 486 that basically failed. Sure, it has a letter in the designation, so only Intel made 486's can be called i486, but what's the difference between an AMD 486, and an i486? Not a whole lot, and the name wasn't enough to set the two apart, hence the term "Pentium" was thought up.

      But that last bit is just my best guess, treat it as such.

      --

      --Nuintari

      slashdot : where an opinion can be wrong.

    5. Re:change back to 80686 then? by JollyFinn · · Score: 1

      Hexium666 Would be patentable winner.

      --
      Emacs is good operating system, but it has one flaw: Its text editor could be better.
    6. Re:change back to 80686 then? by MarcQuadra · · Score: 1

      the x in x86 is a generational thing.

      There have been different brands of chip based on the same generation technology, for instance:

      586 = pentium
      686 = ppro, pII, pIII, pM*
      786** = p4

      * the pentium M looks a lot like the p4 on paper, but is actually closer to the pIII in architecture.

      ** I don't think anyone actually referred to the p4 as the 786, even though it represented a dramatic-enough redesign to warrant it.

      It should also be noted that the difference that defined the 686 from the 586 was that 686 chips are actually more like RISC chips EMULATING x86. If you were in IT when the PentiumPro and PII came out, you'd recall that the 686-based chips ran 16-bit apps much slower than their Pentium counterparts. Also note that the pII and pIII were essentially the same beast, with added instructions and minor reworks to take advantage of SIMD and miniaturization.

      --
      "Sometimes, I think Trent just needs a cup of hot chocolate and a blankie." -Tori Amos on Nine Inch Nails
    7. Re:change back to 80686 then? by drew · · Score: 1

      Although the p4 changed significantly architecturally from the p2 and p3, the core instruction set is the same, which i think is why they are still considered 686's.

      --
      If I don't put anything here, will anyone recognize me anymore?
    8. Re:change back to 80686 then? by sigaar · · Score: 1

      "* the pentium M looks a lot like the p4 on paper, but is actually closer to the pIII in architecture."

      Don't forget to mention that, cycle for cycle, and often at much lower clockspeeds, the last P-III chips are much more powerfull than the P4.

      So flame me. I'm sitting looking at two mail servers, each with a mail queue of about 7000mails, scanning it for virus ans spam, and submitting it to the ISP's relay.

      One is a Coppermine P-III 1ghz, 512mb PC100 RAM. The other is a P4 2.5ghz, 512mb DDR400. Both have identical SCSI controllers, discs, Intel server nics, and they feed the mail through the same connection, both run the same OS and same versions of all the relevant software, so I would say it's fair play.

      Guess which queue is getting smaller quicker? Yeah, the P-III.

      Oh, I lied. It's not fair play. The P-III is running my desktop too.

      --
      sigaar
    9. Re:change back to 80686 then? by MarcQuadra · · Score: 1

      Er... As far as I know the naming of the 'generation' is independent of the instruction set (which remains largely the same) and more about the method by which the CPU processes them. The p4 SHOULD be called a 786, all signs clearly point to this, it just isn't for some reason. I think a lot of it has to do with it being much less pretty to say:

      "[four|five|six]-eighty-six" sounds good, "seven-eighty-six" is sorta ugly.

      --
      "Sometimes, I think Trent just needs a cup of hot chocolate and a blankie." -Tori Amos on Nine Inch Nails
    10. Re:change back to 80686 then? by MarcQuadra · · Score: 1

      Word! I'm actually holding off on replacing my PowerPC file server until I can get a Pentium-M based desktop board to use instead. It's a shame these aren't out in full-force yet; I bet a speedy but low-power/low-heat silent pM would outsell a lot of what Dell is foisting these days.

      I would get a VIA EPIA, but they really lack the solid feel and performance I get from VIA, Intel, and Apple boards. Also, the VERY lame compiler support for VIA's CPUs is most discouraging.

      The oter option is a last-gen pIII on a decent micro-atx board, which I might have to resort to if the aforementioned pM mobos don't come around soon.

      The pM is most pleasing, it really does a fantastic job of keeping cool and delivering the goods, at least on the laptops I've worked on.

      --
      "Sometimes, I think Trent just needs a cup of hot chocolate and a blankie." -Tori Amos on Nine Inch Nails
  18. Re:Does anyone know... by pavon · · Score: 4, Informative

    People still by 486 processors and higher for (relatively) heavy-weight embedded systems. Old design processors are far more forgiving of nasty environments (heat, cold, humidity, dust, vibration) than new top-of-the-line ones.

  19. But 300 MHz survives! by AvantLegion · · Score: 1, Insightful
    300 MHz, you are the survivor! Fear is obviously not a factor for you. You're hired!

    Seriously though, what about the 300 MHz P2? Or 400 for that matter? Were they both canned earlier? Intel hatin' on 100 MHz FSB P2s?

    1. Re:But 300 MHz survives! by bhtooefr · · Score: 1

      Maybe they're still around, or, from what I heard, a faster FSB consumes more power (at least on the P-M, which jumps to 27W on a 533 (133) FSB, and it's a P6 also), and more power consumption is NOT something one would want in embedded.

      My money's on they've been phased out a LONG time ago.

      Also, (flame me if you like - OT part begins here), I marked you as a foe just now. Nothing personal, I just do that with all free X sigs and all who have a shock site as their web site or in their sig.

    2. Re:But 300 MHz survives! by grocer · · Score: 1

      I don't think there was a PII 300 with a 100 mhz bus...they were all 66 mhz at a 4.5 multiplier...intel speed bumped the bus and kept the multipliers...so it went like 350, 400, 450 because they were 233, 266, 300 in the original release.

      Granted this is all very fuzzy memory from having built computers at the time...

    3. Re:But 300 MHz survives! by AvantLegion · · Score: 1
      You're right - I was thinking of 350, not 300.

  20. I Fought Moore's Law And The Law Won by tiktok · · Score: 5, Funny

    The Pentium 2 chip's light may be waning, but I still have two fileservers that will continue to defy Moore's Law.

    I guess now could be the time to publish that book "101 Uses For An Obsolete Pentium 2 Chip". Bathroom tiles? Floor mosaic? Xmas ornaments?

    1. Re:I Fought Moore's Law And The Law Won by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My PII 350mHz runs my Smoothwall firewall without a hitch, Also running Squid & Dansguardian too. Oh, one more thing, it's also Folding 24/7. Even though this style CPU looks like a game cartridge for an Atari 2600 it seems to get it's job done. Rather useful for me.

    2. Re:I Fought Moore's Law And The Law Won by DarkAurora · · Score: 1

      I have one of the original Pentiums as a key chain. (It was one of the ones with the floating point bug that everyone had to throw away anyway)

    3. Re:I Fought Moore's Law And The Law Won by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Umm, how could you forget "disco ball" on that list?

    4. Re:I Fought Moore's Law And The Law Won by bplipschitz · · Score: 1

      The Pentium 2 chip's light may be waning, but I still have two fileservers that will continue to defy Moore's Law.

      My firewall is [and will continue to be] a Pentium 75 MHz machine, with 40 Mb of RAM. It just doesn't need to be any bigger/better/faster.

      My Mail machine is a dual 75 MHz sun sparcserver 20. Again, fast enough for the job.

      I guess now could be the time to publish that book "101 Uses For An Obsolete Pentium 2 Chip". Bathroom tiles? Floor mosaic? Xmas ornaments?

      Neckerchief slides for the Intel Youth Corps.

    5. Re:I Fought Moore's Law And The Law Won by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We have a production webserver/mysql box running a PII, and it runs fine. Dual NICs, 3x10k RPM disks setup as RAID, 1G RAM. The applications are limited by our network connectivity, not the CPU. I'm tempted to reformat the disks and move away from RedHat 7.3, but we measure uptimes in years, so it's not a priority. Fedora legacy are still maintaining the OS. I'd like to see if we can get a decade out of the old box, but we'll see.

    6. Re:I Fought Moore's Law And The Law Won by M1FCJ · · Score: 1

      We have a similar dual-PII box running webserver/mysql combo for intranet. Runs two seti@home processes as well. Just works. A colleague and I installed it with Suse 9 FTP after the previous box, a Pentium-200's SCSI drives died on us. I intend to run it until it dies.

    7. Re:I Fought Moore's Law And The Law Won by mvdw · · Score: 1

      My firewall: PII-400

      My print server: PII-266

      My file server: PII-400

      I don't see why I'd want or need anything faster for these purposes. Even the firewall and print server are overkill, but they were cheap...

  21. They still make these things? by MonkeyCookie · · Score: 0, Redundant

    I'm hardly going to miss the Pentium II. I didn't even know that Intel was still producing the things!

    They're so old technology-wise that I just figured they had stopped making the Pentium II a long time ago.

    I'm sure there will still be plenty to be found in the used chip market and in older computers that nobody wants.

    1. Re:They still make these things? by DogDude · · Score: 1

      I'm sure there will still be plenty to be found in the used chip market and in older computers that nobody wants.

      Speak for yourself. I just bought 2 for home computers. They work fine. Saved a lot of money, and got some serious Geek Karma (as opposed to going to Best Buy which costs serious Geek Karma).

      --
      I don't respond to AC's.
    2. Re:They still make these things? by MonkeyCookie · · Score: 1

      True, Pentium II chips are still overkill for some uses: simple web terminal, print server, file server, etc. There's nothing like a cheap/free computer to install Linux on, eh? That's what I'm doing right now: I have a Pentium MMX 200 computer that I'm planning to put Linux on and use it as an email/chatting/web-browsing computer.

      There are still a lot of people, however, who are getting rid of their Pentium II computers and can't find anyone to buy them. There's just not a big demand for them anymore. That was just what I was referring to: there is still a demand, but it's much less than the supply.

  22. 350 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I still use a 350 P II machine to build and test the windows versions of my free software!

  23. Original Press Release by JaF893 · · Score: 3, Informative

    The original Press Release is still on the Intel website. Its hard to believe that this was cutting edge back in 1997.

    1. Re:Original Press Release by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is still cutting edge, as NetBurst was a NetBust, and Intel's going back to P6 for their P-M. *rimshot* It's just now it's got SSE(2), and a faster bus.

      Thanks, I'll be here all week!

  24. FORMALLY???? by gstoddart · · Score: 3, Funny

    They're formally not making any more PII's???

    Are they still informally making PII's and I just missed it?

    Or is this just like saying the 90's are officially over?

    I'm confused.

    --
    Lost at C:>. Found at C.
    1. Re:FORMALLY???? by n0mad6 · · Score: 1
      Are they still informally making PII's and I just missed it?

      The Intel engineers who worked on the PII project realized that the weekend parties where they were getting together at to build more were having a toll on their families...

  25. Damn! by RikRat · · Score: 1

    Dammit, I was just going to buy a new Pentium II 266! Now I need to hurry.

    1. Re:Damn! by bhtooefr · · Score: 1

      http://www.dumpinggoods.com/dumpinggoods/itemdesc. asp?CartId=8-ACCWARE-321007DVDKM267&ic=CP%2DINT%2D 0002&cc=&tpc=

      $2, but then again, you'll have to pay $9 in shipping (at least to my address, that's what their P2s cost)...

    2. Re:Damn! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I've got one I can sell ya. What say you to $400?

  26. No! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Darnit! First they kill the 8088 and now THIS! I am I ever going to keep living in the past?

  27. Wild speculation by gr8_phk · · Score: 1

    Since those chips are made on an old process, is Intel going to upgrade the fab, close it, or manufacture something that can still make use of it. Licensing DMD from TI would be a nice replacement for the failed LCOS initiative and it doesn't require state of the art chip geometry. Not that I've ever heard of TI licensing that stuff.

  28. 1997 - 2006 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    It's not even 2005 yet!

    I'm not dead yet!! Quit writing my obituary!

    -Pentium II

  29. One may ask, why? by Staplerh · · Score: 4, Insightful

    This trend to move away from old technology such as the Pentium II that still serves a valid purpose is silly, part of a push to always be bigger and better.

    Now I'm not saying that the Pentium II is viable for any new programmes, heck, I find my Pentium 4 a little slow at times. I first started questioning this push over the summer, when I worked at a Canadian government office. The workers there ALL had brand-new Pentium 4 Dells (and it wasn't just our office, the entire facility had been upgraded), with full sound cards, video, you name it. Of course, sound was all deactivated as it was a cubicle farm.

    Needless to say, what did the people use these Pentium 4's for? Word Processing. Perhaps a bit of Excel, and some random surfing of the web. I wasn't complaining, because I was underworked and could take advantage of the Pentium 4's spectacular Solitaire and Minesweeper processing, but it wasn't necessary.

    The Pentium II can run Office applications fine, and heck, that's waht the majority of work force productivity is? Now you'll have to buy a better model to use Word.. wow.

    I don't know the cost difference in terms of productivity between the P2 and the P4, and I'm sure they can concentrate on just producting the P4 even more on masse, but this is simply going to give procurement departments an excuse to connive themselves better equipment.

    Well, that devolved into a rant, but hopefully my point can still come across clear! Cheers.

    --
    "There's no success like failure, and failure's no success at all."
    - Bob Dylan
    1. Re:One may ask, why? by Frank+T.+Lofaro+Jr. · · Score: 2, Insightful

      You are forced to get new versions of Windows (security holes, Microsoft and other vendors refusing to support or write software for old versions, needing new windows versions to run new Office versions to read files your customers/coworkers/clients sent using the new version of Office) almost all the time, and they need more memory and CPU, or else performance becomes dreadful.

      So you need to upgrade just to stay in place (performance wise).

      That is, unless you are lucky enough to be free of Microsoft.

      --
      Just because it CAN be done, doesn't mean it should!
    2. Re:One may ask, why? by g0hare · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Bran new Dell, WInodws XP Pro, under $400. Better than ATA 33, faster ram access, faster hard drives, etc, etc. If you get more than $134 a year in inreaseed productivity PLUS you can get rid of 98, it's a no-=brainer. Upgrade.

      --
      Vote Quimby!
    3. Re:One may ask, why? by Surt · · Score: 1

      You may not need p4s over p2s for their processing power, but the power management features on more modern pcs will help an upgrade now pay off for many businesses in power cost savings.

      --
      "Who is the Journal of Quantum Physics going to believe?" --Stephen Hawking
    4. Re:One may ask, why? by jayhawk88 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I'd be shocked if Windows XP ran (acceptably) well on a P2. Don't run XP you say? Problem is, depending on your licensing agreement with MS, you might not have much of a choice. Linux might be an option of course, then again, it might not be.

      Added into this is the fact that sometimes you have money you have to spend on upgrading computers whether it makes sense or not, because of budget reasons. "You had $15k in your budget set aside to upgrade your office machines and you didn't do it, here's a nice fat budget cut". Stupid yes, but more often than not one has to work within the rules of the system. Plus the general "happy worker" factor you get from people getting brand new machines from time to time.

      The point is that even though there may not be much productivity difference between a P2 and a P4, there are often other factors.

    5. Re:One may ask, why? by XPisthenewNT · · Score: 1

      I think it's more that employers want to buy new parts, with warrantys instead of spending time cobbling together old PII's and experiencing downtime when old components inevitably fail. Besides, any business that's been around more than a couple years is used to buying $3000 workstations, getting a Dell for $800 a seat is like nothing to them. Additionally, it improves morale, the employees feel better if they think thier employer values them enough to buy them up to date equipment.

      It it were possible to buy slower, new, warrantied equipment at an appropriately reduced price, I'm sure companies would go for it.

    6. Re:One may ask, why? by swb · · Score: 1

      But this is typical in all walks of life.

      I've recently gotten into shooting, and as I've researched handguns it's amazing the "requirement" for personal defense was often the fairly low-powered .25 ACP and .32 ACP. Even police officers only carried .32 caliber revolvers around 75 years ago.

      Now the requirement is considered *at minimum* to be 9 mm, and even that at +P or the ill-defined +P+ pressure loadings, which are usually at the outer edge of modern firearm pressure design parameters. Many others consider more powerful cartridges such as .40S&W and .45 ACP to be necessary for "stopping power".

      Some of the definition of "stopping power" (one shot, incapacitated attacker, even if fueled by drugs and rage -- the apocryphal PCP user) has changed over time, but as I did my research I found that even a .25 ACP round has a similar amount of force, concentrated in a small area, as a baseball bat swung by an average male. .32 rounds are slightly more powerful than a baseball bat swung by a major league player, concentrated in the bullet's cross section.

      To me, getting hit by anyone swinging a baseball bat is a pretty serious thing, especially if the force is concentrated in a tiny cross section. I think the increased desire for power in firearms has some legitimacy, but it also strikes me as just a demand for power.

      I think this is probably true in many things we buy or use.

    7. Re:One may ask, why? by brucmack · · Score: 1

      I've run XP perfectly well on a Pentium 200. I wasn't running anything particularly demanding on it, but the OS itself ran fine and was responsive.

    8. Re:One may ask, why? by jensend · · Score: 2, Informative

      The PII was designed for processes (.35 and .25 if I remember correctly) which Intel has since (for good reasons) scrapped. With the troubles with .09 and smaller processes, the .13 process may last a good bit longer, and so the P3 Tualatin may last a good long time.

    9. Re:One may ask, why? by iggymanz · · Score: 1

      increased productivity? my 98se has never been infected by spyware. my XP laptop lasted less than a month and I installed all security patches. The one piece of adware/spyware I couldn't remove had installed itself as a kernel dll with registry entries, so file was always locked. Putting the drive on another machine and removing the file resulted in a nonbootable sytem. Good thing the gig I was on that required XP was winding down so I blew away XP and installed SuSE linux and VMware workstation with Win 2000 Pro under it.

    10. Re:One may ask, why? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Pentium 2's might still be good for the basic word processing/email/internet applications, but what about all of the applications running in the background?

      Speaking from experience, my entire company just upgraded to new P4 2.4ghz machines and they run a hell of a lot quicker than my previous P3 1.2ghz. Background applications are the number one culprit. In my environment we have new improved antivirus, LANDesk (so big brother can spy on us), individual firewall configs (yes, every device has it's own firewall... overdoing it in my opinion, but then again we have been slammed in the past on the internal network)

      My point is we have many more non-interactive applications running on our systems now adays than we did in the past. Yes, we may not utilize 100% of our brand new cpus all of the time, but I dare you to run this on an old P2-500mhz and tell me everything is running fast enough for you.

    11. Re:One may ask, why? by dmaxwell · · Score: 1

      I'd be shocked if Windows XP ran (acceptably) well on a P2.

      With 256 MB of RAM, it's tolerable. With 384 MB or more, it feels just fine for routine Office stuff.

    12. Re:One may ask, why? by MindStalker · · Score: 1

      Thats more government than it is private industry. Sadly its becoming more of a problem than less. My grant based institution used to be able to roll over money so that we could save up money over a few years for large upgrades. This is nolonger the case, and I don't know how we are going to manage being forced to piecemeal our upgrades a few parts per year.

    13. Re:One may ask, why? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      those poor slobs. all the secretaries in my office have quad xeons systems with 16 GB ram and scsi-320 disks in raid cages. yet still they complain about their computer. "it's too noisy!", "can you turn up the AC? it's hot in here!", etc. well one good thing is that they wear lighter clothes now...

    14. Re:One may ask, why? by Zerbey · · Score: 1

      Runs good on anything higher than a P200. I've not tried it on anything slower, but I wouldn't be surprised if it ran fine on slower hardware.

      What XP needs is memory, LOTS of memory. Once you turn off the silly themes and all the other unnecessary fluff it's very usable on slower hardware.

    15. Re:One may ask, why? by Darren+Winsper · · Score: 1

      I've got a PIII laptop that's stuck at 333MHz and it'll run Windows XP reasonably well.

    16. Re:One may ask, why? by Benanov · · Score: 1

      XP Pro ran beautifully for a long time on a P2-350 256MB.

      Of course I had to tweak it a LOT...

    17. Re:One may ask, why? by WhiteWolf666 · · Score: 1

      Several PCs in our office run XP on PII class machines.

      The key is more ram.

      384-512 mb ram, and everything feels just dandy.

      Harddisk upgrades are nice, too, but the processor speed really isn't that important.

      We've got people working on 400 mhz machines with 512 mbs of ram, newish 80 gig 7200 rpm drives, 17" lcds with geforce era video cards. We're a small business, and we bargain hunt for all this stuff (80 gig drives from office depot for $20 after rebate, 17" lcds for 179$ after rebate, 512 or 256 mb dimms for 20-30$ after rebate. Whatever crappy radeon 9000 we can find for nothing at the local retailers when they go on sale, etc. . .) To be honest, the biggest 'happy' factor came when everyone got brand new black lcd screens. Lots of smiles at that upgrade.

      Makes a decent, responsive office machine, with a low cost to us, and has been a convenient upgrade path.

      Now, I've been lobbying like crazy to switch machines to linux, and slow, one-by-one, I've been making converts, but it doesn't happen to quickly, unfortunately. Personally, I refuse to use anything Windows----OS X on my powerbook, SuSE 9.2 on my servers and desktops.

      But for the other people in my office, whom I don't have the time yet to train on linux (but I will), XP runs fine on their older machines.

      --
      WhiteWolf666 an exBush supporter. All you new-school,compassionate,save the children Republicans can rot in hell
    18. Re:One may ask, why? by dasunt · · Score: 1

      I'd be shocked if Windows XP ran (acceptably) well on a P2. Don't run XP you say? Problem is, depending on your licensing agreement with MS, you might not have much of a choice. Linux might be an option of course, then again, it might not be.

      Ah, but linux isn't a viable option when price is a consideration, since linux only runs on mainframes, thus leading to a much higher TCO than a Microsoft Windows-based solution.

      You must not have seen any of the recent informative Microsoft ads. :P

      ( FYI, I'm on vacation atm and am using a "throwaway" pentium 75 to type this via w3m. Amazingly enough, with the right distribution, and the right toolset, this machine is surprisingly productive. I have chat (irssi), IM (centericq or bitlbee), text editing (vim) and document creation (latex). )

    19. Re:One may ask, why? by npistentis · · Score: 1

      I found an old Dell machine laying around when I was looking for a Win98 platform to test some software... I was surprised to discover that this P2 266mhz box with 128mb ram was running XP- and doing so fairly well, for that matter. Which isnt to say it wasnt promptly formatted anyway, but the point is that is worked. Took a little while to boot though...

      --
      Gentlemen, you can't fight in here! This is the War Room!
    20. Re:One may ask, why? by EmagGeek · · Score: 1

      It is good to get rid of the processors that use larger die sizes because the most expensive part is the silicon wafer. Since the demand generated by a P2 is so tiny, they basically have to sell them at cost...

    21. Re:One may ask, why? by Hognoxious · · Score: 1
      I think the increased desire for power in firearms has some legitimacy, but it also strikes me as just a demand for power.
      You have a point, but remember that protective equipment is becoming better and more common. I saw some footage of some latter-day "Ned Kelly" types in a shootout with some cops, and bullets were bouncing off them. IIRC, they only got them because one officer crept up behind a hedge and shot one from point-blank range in the gap between the body armour & the helmet.
      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    22. Re:One may ask, why? by Malc · · Score: 1

      You can't get much support for older systems. Replacing parts is hard. Eventually it becomes cheaper to upgrade than keep supporting something deemed obsolete by the industry, even if it still fullfills your needs. If you need to run Windows, good luck using a version that is actually supported by Microsoft. Even close to EOL OSes like NT4 cost more in maintenance and compatibility these days - look how long it takes to install NT4 (with all patches) versus XP (or buying a system with XP already installed)

    23. Re:One may ask, why? by Malc · · Score: 1

      Oh, and to add to that: new systems need to be bought all the time. This widens the range of systems for MIS/IT depts to support. Forcing a mass upgrade of the older systems simplifies their jobs, lowers costs and makes them more efficient.

    24. Re:One may ask, why? by Cynikal · · Score: 1

      "I'd be shocked if Windows XP ran (acceptably) well on a P2."

      well i used to run XP on my old celeron 400, and it ran pretty ok, And of course a cel400 was basically a gimped p2 at the time. it had 512mb ram and was tweaked up a bit, but it ran smoothly... of course with today's service packs and hot fixes, it would probly take a week to log in, but at the time i had no complaints.

    25. Re:One may ask, why? by oconnorcjo · · Score: 1
      This trend to move away from old technology such as the Pentium II that still serves a valid purpose is silly, part of a push to always be bigger and better.

      I am intel and I have XYZ space in a factory making pentium II's that are selling for 2-3 dollars a pop.
      Think about that. Now think about using that factory space to produce something with real profit margins!

      Intel does not care if you or anybody else thinks pentium II's work good enough. What they care about is making chips that MAKE MONEY.

      BTW: Upgrading pII -> pIV was probably a good move just to get win XP which is a far superior OS over win 95/98 when it comes to features and stability (with firewall\AV\and patches installed). If for anyone, your IT staff will be happier.

      --
      I miss the Karma Whores.
    26. Re:One may ask, why? by swb · · Score: 1

      While I don't doubt that more sophisticated and organized criminals may be utilizing body armor, considering that the average cop only fires his weapon during qualifying, it still strikes me as machismo run amok the way "stopping power" is flaunted.

      And if body armor is a real problem, we'll need to issue rifles, since class IV armor will stop almost every handgun round, with the exception of the ridiculous rounds like .50AE and .454 Casull.

    27. Re:One may ask, why? by afidel · · Score: 1

      Besides a hand gun is retarded for stopping power, if it has enough power to stop someone it has too much power for most people to handle correctly. If you want to stop someone in one shot in a home defense situation a 12 guage shotgun with buckshot is a damn fine choice IMHO.

      --
      There are 4 boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order. Starting now.
    28. Re:One may ask, why? by acidrain69 · · Score: 1

      Many child posters noted this is possible and tolerable with tweaking.

      see TweakXP on how to do this.

      --
      -- Having a Creationist Museum is like having an Atheist place of worship
    29. Re:One may ask, why? by swb · · Score: 1

      And many home-defense books agree with you -- limited aiming requirements, very inexpensive (a brand-new Mossberg 500 is like $350), easily obtainable ammo, trivial to use and highly intimidating, as well as offering a low risk over overpenetration on soft backstops.

      There are downsides, though. Shotguns are unweildy in close quarters, and the small pellet count in buck loads at close distances produces a tight pattern in even open chokes that still requires aiming. It's hard to find places where a shotgun can practice fired, especially in urban settings. It's hard to store a shotgun both secure enough to keep burglars and kids out of it, yet easy to access when it's needed. The heavy game loads required for serious stopping power in a shotgun produce more recoil, particularly in pump-action guns, than most of the effective handgun rounds and my be overwhelming for smaller shooters (moving down to 20 guage isn't much help, since the loss in recoil includes a loss of pellet count and much more restricted load choices). They're also awkward to reload.

      The handgun's liabilities -- aiming, more limited power and overpenetraton risk -- are easily mitigated. Practice is required for any firearm defense solution, and a handgun is easier to practice with, particularly for urban residents. The handgun's more limited power vs. buck shotgun loads is like calling a pickup underpowered for moving a piano vs. a semi; handguns are proven people stoppers, even in .38 special loads. Overpenetration can be mitigated by the use of frangible ammo like Glaser safety slugs designed to break apart on hard surfaces.

      Furthermore, a handgun is easy to store in a small bedside safe, and even petite women can easily handle heavier loads such as .45ACP without a lot of problems. They're fast to reload and can be carried outside the home for protection in ways and places a shotgun can't.

    30. Re:One may ask, why? by Scudsucker · · Score: 1

      Yes, increased productivity. Faster processor == less waiting == more productivity. As for your 98 vs XP experince, its a nice annecdote, but thats all it is.

    31. Re:One may ask, why? by wayward_son · · Score: 1

      This is what happens when those responsible for purchasing decisions are too damn stupid to buy more RAM/larger hard drive.

      PII-400/128MB RAM/10GB: Badass in 1998, but Win2k Pro is a bit much these days.

      "Oh, my the computers are slow! Let's get new ones!"

      Never mind that a stick or two of RAM would have solved the problem for a fraction of the cost.

      I'm happy as a clam at work with an AMD Athlon 800Mhz + 768MB RAM + Win2k Pro. And I am a developer for a Java based application!

    32. Re:One may ask, why? by MtViewGuy · · Score: 1

      Windows XP does run fairly well on a Pentium II-based system, but you definitely want to get a faster hard disk interface than the ATA-33 interfaces used on most motherboards that accept Pentium II CPU's.

      If your motherboard supports ATA-66 IDE connections, then with 512 MB of system RAM Windows XP will run fine even on Pentium II-based systems.

    33. Re:One may ask, why? by Zoxed · · Score: 1

      Ditto here: our main customer supplies/requires Office XP format files, so we need Office XP, which needs Windows XP, which means new PCs.

      But there is no money for upgrading our underpowered Sun servers, which is our target platform for SW development :-(

    34. Re:One may ask, why? by taradfong · · Score: 1

      Big dies also mean lower yields. Given a fixed number of flaws, you are more likely to have one on a chip when the chip is bigger. Think about it; if the die took up the whole wafer, the yield would be zero unless there were zero imperfections.

      --
      Does it hurt to hear them lying? Was this the only world you had?
  30. Pentium II? Heh, try the 8088 by shoppa · · Score: 1

    The 8088 (the processor used in the original IBM PC) is still current production. (Not made by IBM but by others, remember second-sourcing? Seems like a quant concept today.)

  31. Production of reduction? by Zemplar · · Score: 1

    My only experience with the PII in the last few years have been carting them off as waste!

    I'm sure I could have had this market cornered if only I had saved them. And yes they worked, but typically the machines were economically totaled and did not warrant any use of funds for refurbishing.

    Certainly not a bad product....back in it's day.

  32. They're STILL being made? by imstanny · · Score: 0

    and people STILL buy them?

  33. Doh! by kyoko21 · · Score: 1

    Doh! I still need to get a PII 450 to install into my dual 440GX board. I hope I will get one in time!

    1. Re:Doh! by cide1 · · Score: 1

      You most likely can use a PIII. I have an asus 440BX dual board that was designed for PII processors, but I put two 700s in it no problem. Check the FSB and multiplier maximums. Sometimes its a factor of what rev of the board you have, and what version bios is installed. On mine, Asus P2B-D, the owners manual doesnt say it's possilbe, but it's been my desktop for 6 years or so.

      A neat trick on 440BX is that when you overclock the FSB to 133 MHz, the pci cards go back to their correct 33 MHz, but the AGP slot doesnt get corrected. This let me get extra CPU speed, high data tranfer to my video card, but didnt lock up due to crappy PCI cards.

      The one thing to remember about these systems though is, a dual PIII with PC100 memory is incredibly memory bound. The memory just cant feed the CPU fast enough, and you lose a lot of cycles. On the other hand, the PIII is an incredibly efficient architecture, with only 10 pipeline stages.

      At any rate, before buying PIIs, make sure you cant put some newer PIIIs in there.

      --
      -- the computer doesn't want any beer, no matter how much you think it does. NEVER, EVER feed your computer beer.
  34. Has Netcraft Confirmed it? by Discotechnica · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    I won't beleive it untill netcraft has confirmed it.

    1. Re:Has Netcraft Confirmed it? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Forgive my ignorance, but can someone explain to me the whole joke about Netcraft? I've seen it in several /. threads, but I just don't get it.

  35. Might not run HL2, but... by Anne_Nonymous · · Score: 1

    When paired properly with "obsolete" software, "obsolete" hardware works beautifully.

    1. Re:Might not run HL2, but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not necessarily. A 25MHz M68040 runs the latest NetBSD (Emacs, TeX and all) beautifully.

      Of course, you either wait a few hours for a kernel build, or you cross-compile.

  36. A Great Processor by Creamsickle · · Score: 1

    This was a great processor that still keeps ticking. I've got a PII 266Mhz machine running Slackware that I'm still using as a firewall, proxy server, file server, and game server. I'll take one of these solid well designed CPUs from back when they really knew how to make them anyday over stuff on the market now. RIP Pentium II, you will be missed.

    --
    On the 0th day, God created C
    1. Re:A Great Processor by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Odd. I consider any CPU from either AMD or Intel to be solid and well designed. I suppose I do agree that Intel's megahertz push went too far with the netburst architecture, but I don't agree that the pII design is better than all "stuff on the market now"

  37. Price of P-IIs Soar? by Saeed+al-Sahaf · · Score: 2, Insightful
    That's a very good point: People pick up some "loyalty" for some reason, often not based on any particular reason, and ignorantly discount everything else as being inferior. Can we think of any other products, either hardware or software, that this applies to?

    Anyway, I wonder if manufactures that have products that are designed around the P-II will start buying them up, creating a shortage. Will we see the price of unused and "reconditioned" P-IIs on Ebay soar?

    --
    "Who are in control, they are not in control of anything - they don't even control themselves!" - Glen Beck
    1. Re:Price of P-IIs Soar? by Ironsides · · Score: 1

      Other Products:
      Video Cards
      Cars and Car Products
      AOL users
      Bottled Water
      Soda

      It's not limited to just us computer geeks.

      --
      Fly me to the moon Let me sing among those stars Let me see what spring is like On jupiter and mars
    2. Re:Price of P-IIs Soar? by Saeed+al-Sahaf · · Score: 1

      This is "flamebait"? Care to explaine?

      --
      "Who are in control, they are not in control of anything - they don't even control themselves!" - Glen Beck
    3. Re:Price of P-IIs Soar? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ok, well after reading your post I guess I'm a fanboy : I recently bought a ViewSonic 20" lcd that uses the same BenQ panel that is used in the Dell variant - the Dell panel was about £125 cheaper but I would nver buy Dell product. I don't like the company image and practices. That's where the "loyaltly" comes from, the fact that people don't agree with certain companies (eg. Dell, Microsoft, Intel) sometimes just because they are big and from the USA.

    4. Re:Price of P-IIs Soar? by rvw14 · · Score: 1

      I have no brand loyalty. If the same product is cheaper with the Dell name stamped on it, guess which one I will buy?

      I did learn the hard way to not go cheap on my power supply. The $75 I saved in buying a crappy no-name part cost me a MB and cpu.

    5. Re:Price of P-IIs Soar? by networkBoy · · Score: 1

      It's not falmebait to me.
      I actually use a mix of processors in my systems.
      VIA, AMD, Intel, Transmetta. . . anything but Cyrix.
      It's all about the right tool for the job (and before anyone says G5, I don't know Gx Assembly).
      -nB

      --
      whois gawk date unzip strip find touch finger mount join nice man top fsck grep eject more yes exit umount sleep dump
    6. Re:Price of P-IIs Soar? by saider · · Score: 1

      It's all about the right tool for the job (and before anyone says G5, I don't know Gx Assembly).

      Is not the G5 a PowerPC derivative (which looks a bit like the old Motorola 68xxx assembly).

      Besides, coding for modern microprocessors in assembly is a waste of time and effort. A current optimizing C compiler will beat the pants of your hand assembled code for all but the most trivial programs.

      --


      Remember, You are unique...just like everyone else.
    7. Re:Price of P-IIs Soar? by Saeed+al-Sahaf · · Score: 1

      Is this true even for small embedded applications?

      --
      "Who are in control, they are not in control of anything - they don't even control themselves!" - Glen Beck
    8. Re:Price of P-IIs Soar? by saider · · Score: 1

      Is this true even for small embedded applications?

      A current C compiler are much better at taking advantage of a modern processor's pipelines and other optimizations to speed up execution. If you look at the generated assembly it looks ugly as hell and is spattered with nop's, but the code actually runs faster than if you coded the app by hand.

      If you are just responding to some external signals and stuffing data through UARTs, then you really don't need a 2GHz microprocessor. But even if you are using an old microcontroller (eg. Motorola 68xxx), I would still recommend C for most of your programming because it is portable. Now you can choose from many different processors and find one that fits your application, instead of being forced to use one that is compatable with your existing assembly code.

      --


      Remember, You are unique...just like everyone else.
    9. Re:Price of P-IIs Soar? by Fareq · · Score: 1

      It is flamebait because it challenges one of the core slashdot beliefs:

      In this case, that all AMD products are infinitely superior to all Intel products simply due to the fact that AMD made them.

      Similarly, one would expect a post which mentioned that Linux is not the greatest operating system ever created -- and that Mac OS X isn't either.

      There are other similar tenets of the Slashdot religion, just set up /. to add +5 for "flamebait" and you'll find them.

    10. Re:Price of P-IIs Soar? by The+Conductor · · Score: 1
      Well, how about a sub-section of a larger program? Someone might want to to write an assembly routine for the core functions (to process video for example), and link it into a much larger C program that handles everyting else. In that case you may want to write a fair amount of assembly code.

      Not a very common situation though, especially when you take away any really high- or low- volume applications. In the former case it is cheaper to simply throw a faster processor at it. In the latter, one's familliarity with x86 assembly will be trumped by PPC's or ARM's lower MIPS per watt, or the possibility of using custom hardware (FPGA or ASIC).

    11. Re:Price of P-IIs Soar? by saider · · Score: 1

      Well, how about a sub-section of a larger program?

      Every embedded designer needs to do some assembly, usually for configuration registers and such. But if I were developing video processing code, I'd definitely use a C compiler. I wouldn't even think about assembly if it were a modern processor (Pentium 2,3,4, G5 PowerPC, etc). In this case, a compiler with optimizations will outperform hand coded assembly. It may not look pretty, and may actually be a bit larger, but it will run faster. Not only that, but the C code is also portable, so you aren't stuck on CompanyX's processors.

      Unless you know the processor inside and out, use assembly only where you absolutely have to. Optimizing compilers will produce code to take advantage of the CPU's features, like multiple pipelines, register renaming, out of order execution, etc. Unless you know how all of this works for your processor, my bet is that the compiler will produce faster code.

      --


      Remember, You are unique...just like everyone else.
  38. What's next after Pentium? by yorkpaddy · · Score: 1

    I remember it was a big deal when intel went from the 486 to Pentium. well they keep on milking the Pentium name 2,3,4. Why not the Octium or Nonium?

    --
    "brxref .k.p ,.by xprt. gbe.p.oycmaycbi yd. cby.nci.bj. ru yd. am.pcjab lgxlcj" don'
    1. Re:What's next after Pentium? by Mulletproof · · Score: 1

      "Why not the Octium or Nonium?

      Because you sould like a bad D&D game?

      --
      You need a FREE iPod Nano
    2. Re:What's next after Pentium? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What about crapium, shitium, hoverheatium, floatingpointbugium, overpricium?

      I flame because I care. ;-)

    3. Re:What's next after Pentium? by Anne+Thwacks · · Score: 1
      Crapium?

      Or you could buy AMD

      --
      Sent from my ASR33 using ASCII
  39. Stock up! by derxob · · Score: 0

    Looks like I'll be stocking up on the last ever Pentium II's! These babys will be hotter than an autograph of Jesus.

    --
    Beat the computer, program your life.
  40. Better Spyware Performance by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    was One may ask, why? (Score:3, Insightful)

    Needless to say, what did the people use these Pentium 4's for? Word Processing. Perhaps a bit of Excel, and some random surfing of the web. I wasn't complaining, because I was underworked and could take advantage of the Pentium 4's spectacular Solitaire and Minesweeper processing, but it wasn't necessary.

    The Pentium II can run Office applications fine, and heck, that's waht the majority of work force productivity is? Now you'll have to buy a better model to use Word.. wow.


    The newer CPUs are necessary to run the latest spyware and exploits, which could really slow down an older PC.
    1. Re:Better Spyware Performance by Scudsucker · · Score: 1

      The newer CPUs are necessary to run the latest spyware and exploits, which could really slow down an older PC.

      The OP sounds like a snob. As if spyware doesn't slow down P4's or run on P2's, seriously. But yes, even if you're running "just office", a newer machine will still save you time. Compare how long it takes to launch Powerpoint or Excel on your old machine vs a new one. Or running queries in Access or working with large Powerpoint slides. Or using Word, Excel, Powerpoint and Access at the same time.

  41. Amen - AMD has destroyed INTEL for years by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...and finally the mainstream is acknowledging that raw processing power isn't measured in MHZ, but in MIPS.

  42. A few reasons to buy P2s by Noksagt · · Score: 5, Informative

    In addition to the heavier embedded systems, the PII is somewhat popular for people who want to build inexpensive dual-processor machines and/or clusters. Yes, you can get much better performance out of the higher end chips, but you will be paying much more as well. Indeed, even the single-processor PIIs are fast enough for a minimalist desktop or linux box. Until this year, I used my own 300 MHz box for just about everything one does on a business desktop (I don't game & did send my processor-intensive stuff to a more capable beast). Finally, I do know others who have equipment or software that only runs on their legacy machines who would like spare parts or would like to replace the processor to the fastest of the same architecture available.

  43. In related news... by SeaDour · · Score: 4, Funny

    The Compy Corporation has announced that they are restarting production of their Lappy 486 due to an unusual surge in popularity and demand.

  44. In other news... by 222 · · Score: 1

    betamax is dead. Sort of.
    Nothing else to see here, move along :P

    1. Re:In other news... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "... and the US NIST Division of Weights and Measures has recommended that hogsheads, cubits, and ells no longer be used in official government documents."

      Thank heavens. Now America can standardize on the new, internationally recognised units the gallon, foot and pound.

      Oh, wait a minute...

  45. Re:What? by ackthpt · · Score: 1
    They were still being produced?

    In very small quantities, usually distributed for spare parts or industrial applications, would be my guess. I was surprised to see they are still in production. There's still a lot of P II machines out there, doing all that people ask of them. Dropping $1,000 for a new P IV system with all the bells and whistles may appeal to the single geek, but requires more forethought for someone living on a budget. Heck, my laptop is still only a P I machine.

    --

    A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
  46. P2 366, 466 never existed by mczak · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I don't know how they can claim it's discontinued if it never existed in the first place...
    the P2 switched to 100Mhz FSB at 350Mhz, thus a P2 366 and 466 never existed. Since those are for embedded, they might be talking about mobile P2 - 366 mobile P2 indeed exists, but a mobile P2 466 does not (fastest P2 ever was 450Mhz, fastest mobile 400 Mhz).
    And btw, the register gets it wrong: that it is available so long has nothing to do with power consumption and the like, it's simply because certain industry applications require that a chip is available for a long time - embedded chips are still in use after 20 years or so, and it's good if you can still get replacement parts.

    1. Re:P2 366, 466 never existed by pla · · Score: 1

      fastest P2 ever was 450Mhz

      Not true! I personally had a good ol' PII/504. Of course, Intel didn't call it that (they probably just "forgot" to market a 112MHz FSB PII line), but I had one, none-the-less.

  47. Re:Does anyone know... by jridley · · Score: 1

    Hell, there are still a heck of a lot of Z80's being made. Embedded systems. There are a lot of systems running x86 and that don't want fans and such moving parts that can break.

  48. Same Reason Why No One Makes 500 MB Drives by EXTomar · · Score: 1

    Sure Intel could continue to make P2 like Seagate could continue to make 500 MB hard disk drives or like Ford can continue to make Model-Ts. The problem is the profit returns on these are horrible due to a number of problems. Even at sub $10 Intel would be hard pressed to find buyers. Technology has marched on so trying to integrate a P2 or a 500 MB drive into a "modern" system is much harder than buying "modern" components.

    In the end it is about the money. Intel doesn't see any more profit coming from selling the P2 and the market isn't exactly telling them otherwise. As the manufacturers for the support components stop their production there is little use to continue production.

  49. price of beer? by crazy_speeder · · Score: 1

    will this change the price of beer?

    1. Re:price of beer? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nope, still free.

  50. Why not 90nm? by biscuit67 · · Score: 1

    Can anyone explain why Intel do not produce 90nm versions of those chips? I would expect that the change in production method would further improve the power dissipation of these chips. Like said in the article, most of these chips are used for embedded systems and, as such, would benefit from reduced power consumption. BTW, the shuttle still uses a 386 processor. From what I understand, from a very helpful guide at JSC visitor center, is that the shuttle uses less than 50% of the CPU time of the 386 and it has about 256K (yes, K) of memory.

    1. Re:Why not 90nm? by Slack3r78 · · Score: 1

      Because not all of Intel's fabs are equipped to produce chips at 90nm and the ones that are would be far more profitable if used to produce top of the line chips?

    2. Re:Why not 90nm? by ciroknight · · Score: 1

      By the way, the space shuttle uses 8086 chips, and it would be far, far too expensive to retrofit the old fabs with new lithography equipment needed to get the chips down to this size. Not only that, it would probably require a bit of re-engineering, since the chip wouldn't scale perfectly down (trasistors may have decreased in size, but wires have virtually disappeared) and that's worth more than the chip is worth.

      It would however be a neat (expensive) little project to make a disk or two of miniscule pentium 2's and use them in a parrallel computing apparatus (something like voice recognition) just to demonstrate how many of those little buggers you could fit in a tight space, but that's about it.

      --
      "Victory means exit strategy, and it's important for the President to explain to us what the exit strategy is." G.W.Bush
    3. Re:Why not 90nm? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The lower process that the chip is made, the less breakdown of the individual wires/gates it takes for it to lead to failure.
      Embedded environments aren't necessarily about reducing power consumption, but often about ruggedness. You really wouldn't use a P2 in the first place if you're primary concern were power consumption, you'd use it if ease of development and ruggedness were your primary concerns.

    4. Re:Why not 90nm? by toddestan · · Score: 1

      Can anyone explain why Intel do not produce 90nm versions of those chips?

      They did, actually. They are called Pentium III's.

  51. Ah ... the Pentium II by Ganondorf+Dragmire · · Score: 2, Funny

    I knew him well. It replaced my Intel Pentium running at 100MHz. He stood tall at a massive 350MHz. He ran with the games I played the most, even the Legendary Final Fantasy 7 for the PC, of course with the asstance of Mr. Voodoo. Pentium II you will be missed. *trys to flush chip down toilet*

  52. Re:Pentium II? Heh, try the 8088 by bhtooefr · · Score: 2, Informative

    IBM never made the 8088 - back in the day, their fabs were used for mainframe chips.

    Intel made the 8088. Harris, AMD, and NEC were second-sourcers (there were others). Yes, THAT AMD. AMD and Harris went on to second source the 286 (and got it to 20 and 25MHz, respectively - as opposed to Intel's 16MHz), and AMD fought Intel for the right to second source the 386 (Harris was sick of making Intel's chips, I guess) - after that, it was AMD (or NexGen) design (although before the K6, they used large portions of Intel's 386 design, which they were allowed to use).

  53. Dept. comment by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You're "still-waiting-for-my-sexium" due to years of "pent-up-ium--frustration"

  54. Amen! by aristus · · Score: 1

    I've a stack of p2-350 machines, each with 64 MB ram and 4GB scsi-1 hard drives. In their day (1998) they were pretty sweet workstations. In this day they are pretty nice machines running RedHat 7.0 or somesuch. They can be had at "junk shops" for less than US$50. Chuck in a monitor and some upgraded apps, etc, and you have a computer for children, libraries, and 80% of office workers.

    --
    Sometimes seventeen/Syllables aren't enough to/Express a complete
  55. Re:Does anyone know... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Up until about 2 years ago, RIM Blackberries all ran 386s. (They might have changed to 486s since then, as I haven't investigated their specs recently.)

    So, there is definitely a need/interest in certain communities for this kind of hardware. Plus, I'm pretty sure that Nasa doesn't want to run the latest, cutting-edge microprocessor in their multi-billion dollar satellites. It's much easier for them to ensure that their radiation-hardened 486 (or P1 or P2, or whatever) will work, simply because they have years' worth of empirical data to support that.

  56. It's official. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It is official -- Intel confirms: the Pentium II is dying

    One more crippling bombshell hit the already beleaguered Pentium II community when IDC confirmed that Pentium II market share has dropped yet again, now down to less than a fraction of 1 percent of all servers. Coming on the heels of a recent Intel survey which plainly states that the Pentium II has lost more market share, this news serves to reinforce what we've known all along. Pentium II is collapsing in complete disarray, as fittingly exemplified by failing dead last in the recent Sys Admin comprehensive networking test.

    You don't need to be a Kreskin to predict the Pentium II's future. The hand writing is on the wall: the Pentium II faces a bleak future. In fact there won't be any future at all for the Pentium II because the Pentium II is dying. Things are looking very bad for Pentium II. As many of us are already aware, the Pentium II continues to lose market share. Red ink flows like a river of blood.

    All major surveys show that the Pentium II has steadily declined in market share. The Pentium II is very sick and its long term survival prospects are very dim. If the Pentium II is to survive at all it will be among OS dilettante dabblers. The Pentium II continues to decay. Nothing short of a miracle could save it at this point in time. For all practical purposes, the Pentium II is dead.

    Fact: the Pentium II is dying

  57. I have a P2-400 that runs AOK by gelfling · · Score: 2, Interesting

    For normal garden variety desktop office type usage. With W2K and 288MB RAM I see no reason to ever get rid of it.

    I also have a P2-350 that runs absolutely fine for a single peripheral and application, a digital drawing tablet and image scanning. And with an even older W92OSR2 and only a 160MB RAM there is probably no reason to ever change it. When the peripherals fail and I have to replace them with devices that are not supported by the OS I be forced to but that will require only another 100-200MB RAM and an installation of W2K.

    I think this almost biological urge to constantly upgrade CPU power is like a sickness.

    1. Re:I have a P2-400 that runs AOK by Reziac · · Score: 1

      I have to agree with you. Over and over I've seen people run out and buy NEW! SHINY! when old and rusty was still overkill for the work expected of it.

      I still run a P3-550, a P3-500, and a P233 as everyday work machines. The slowest here that has a Real Job is a P120/64mb/Win95-OSR2 -- it still does everything asked of it, so why pitch it out just because it's old?

      --
      ~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
  58. Believe it or not... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...microprocessors are not JUST used in computers. So, yes, the PII is still around, as is the 486 and even the old 8086. Not every piece of hardware is running Windows (or, for that matter, linux).

    For industrial or embedded applications, the underlying computational load doesn't increase with time. So if you've already built a perfectly good system board that handles the load fine, why would you spend the money to upgrade it, just because Intel put out a new chip?

    Industial applications might keep the same base architecture for years--believe it or not, the fact that PC's have a 3 year product cycle doesn't mean every other manufactured product in the world does. A computer-controlled lathe, diverter, barcode scanner, etc, might be state of the art in the industry for a lot longer than 3 years. And then, once it's in place, it's probably not going to be upgraded for a good long while--who takes their assembly floor offline every year or two or even five to completely replace all the computer controlled hardware? And generally, the motivation for upgrading is NOT "the processor is too slow." Oh, and by the way, if the embedded gear will be in service for 10 years, that means 10 years of potentially needing maintenance parts.

    No offense, folks, but there's more to life (and more to technology) than just PC's.

  59. Still using them... by wayward_son · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I am the proud owner of 3 Pentium II based systems. I still use all of them on a regular basis.

    Gateway Solo 9100 (PII-266) running Fedora Core 3

    Back in 1998, this was the ultimate laptop. My college roommate spent a small fortune on his. I got mine from e-bay in 2001. I was working on this laptop when I first heard about 9/11. It's taken a beating, the battery is toast, and the DVD-decoder and video-in features are useless in anything but Windows 98, but it's still chugging along. 320MB RAM helps.

    Dell Inspiron 3200 (PII-266) running Win2k Pro.

    Free from company surplus with a good battery! Unfortunately, it can only do 16 bit color on the 1024x768 display. It's still good for basic office uses and web browsing/e-mail, especially with a wireless card.

    Also, the first generation PII-Mobile processors really cut down on our home heating bill :-)

    Gateway G6-300 (PII-300 upgraded to PII-350) running Fedora Core 3

    I bought this cheap from my roommate who said it "only ran Linux". (I much later found out that the processor was defective, which caused 3D video acceleration to be FOOBAR. Since the Riva 128 video card wasn't DRI supported, Linux worked great) The defective processor was replaced with a good PII-350 when a friend upgraded to a PIII. It is still a great fileserver.

    With enough RAM and the right OS, PII systems can do most of what most people use a computer for. They are still great for the web and for office uses, but are lacking for more processor intensive application.

    So to all you PII fans out there, keep on partying like it's 1999!

    1. Re:Still using them... by pragma_x · · Score: 1

      So to all you PII fans out there, keep on partying like it's 1999!

      W00t. I'm right there with ya.

      I use a P2 400Mhz running Win2kPro at home. I use it for web development, Firefox, C/C++/D/Java programing, and of course photoshop. I upgraded the video from a broken FireGL1000 (ick!) to a Radeon 9000 that I picked up for cheap at Staples. 320MB of RAM certainly does help to keep up with the latest software (within reason of course).

      Seems to me that as old system lines retire, the definition of 'old' slides into 'antique' past a certain point. I suppose it wouldn't be such a bad thing if used PC hardware had the relibility of, say, a Nintendo; one can buy 20 year old carts that work like new at yard sales. But old PCs seem to get scrapped rather than kept for parts. My old C64 and Amiga in the closet can attest to this trend.

      So, good luck keeping your P2's in working order in the years to come. I know once I replace this machine, it'll be reincarnated as a linux server of some kind. :)

    2. Re:Still using them... by mrmaster · · Score: 1

      Offices uses! All 7 of our bank offices have 500 mhz celerons in all the computers. I am the only fortunate retail employee that has a 1 gig p3. Kinda hard to use more than a few windows in these buggers.

  60. Certainly not power issues... by evilviper · · Score: 5, Informative

    The PII certainly can't be hanging on this long for power-consumption reasons. For one thing, PIIIs were much more power-thrifty. In fact, some of the PIIIs were the lowest power processors since Intel made 486s...

    PIII-500E 13.2W
    Cel-533A 11.2W
    PIII-933 11.61W

    Compare that to the fastest PII:

    PII-450 27.1W

    --
    Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
    1. Re:Certainly not power issues... by fdawg · · Score: 1

      Interesting. Is there a source or database with these numbers? Im curious to see what the varios machines at home are burning.

    2. Re:Certainly not power issues... by vondo · · Score: 1
      Probably more like once your product is designed and in production, you don't want to change the CPU you use.

      We recently had a replace a 486DX2 in a computer controlled milling machine we use. It's not 10 years old though, I wouldn't think.

    3. Re:Certainly not power issues... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    4. Re:Certainly not power issues... by myowntrueself · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I remember reading somewhere (probably /.) that had Intel not stolen technologies from AMD, the 486 would have required raised-floor cooling systems.

      --
      In the free world the media isn't government run; the government is media run.
    5. Re:Certainly not power issues... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A Deschutes PII-450 underclocked to 66 FSB and undervolted suitably (say, to 1.75v) dissipates less than 10W and doesn't even need a fan on the stock heatsink. I've been using one in this manner for a while as a firewall/NAT/edge appliance, which is generally what Cisco uses these CPUs for.

      A simple way to do this is to stick it in a 440LX motherboard (with an FSB of 66 MHz) instead of the 440BX.

    6. Re:Certainly not power issues... by evilviper · · Score: 1
      PII-450 underclocked to 66 FSB and undervolted suitably (say, to 1.75v) dissipates less than 10W and doesn't even need a fan on the stock heatsink.

      Okay, but if you did the same with a PIII 500, it would use MUCH less power still...
      --
      Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
  61. I used a 186 PC by JackJudge · · Score: 1

    Must've been around '90 or '91. It was a genuine IBM -XT type case, in the days when they were making them out dwarf star alloy.
    It was at a customer's site and the only noticeable thing about it was that it had a cassette (as in the old Philips audio jobs) in one of the 5.25 drive bays as a back-up device.
    I thought this was pretty cool in such an old box so I ran my totally legit copy of PC-Tools 4.24 to see what else it had with the sys-info page. And there it was, a 186 CPU.
    I think it ran at 8.x MHz and had 512KB RAM. It was being used as an office machine and apart from a keyboard gunged up with enough organic matter to interest Friends Of The Earth, it was still going strong.
    Ahhh, memories...

    1. Re:I used a 186 PC by bhtooefr · · Score: 1

      I'm not saying that 186 PCs didn't exist, I've just heard that they were a total BITCH to engineer because of the way the 186 worked. The 286 apparently fell back somewhat on the changes so that it worked with the PC architecture, or they finally figured out how to get the PC arch working with the changes, or something like that.

    2. Re:I used a 186 PC by Hognoxious · · Score: 1
      I heard they were a bit bizarre too - and as a side effect, there were very few viruses that affected them.

      We had a few at uni, RM jobbies I think. Horrid.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    3. Re:I used a 186 PC by sremick · · Score: 1

      The Tandy TRS-80 Model 2000 was an 80186. It was our first computer when I was growing up.

      Odd format of 5.25 floppies (although it could read/write/format standard IBM ones too with special command-line params or separate tools). Odd video controller. No default clock or mouse... we added a clock/calendar and mouse board (oh yeah, funky proprietary add-on boards). Didn't even do graphics out of the box... we added that too. My dad didn't go for the hard drive... IIRC there was a version of Windows 1.0 available for it. Anything graphical had to be specifically for the Tandy 2000. We DID have MS Flight Simulator... that was fun. DR-Graph, DR-Draw... and a bunch of Infocom text adventures. I also spent a lot of time in BASIC.

      Ahh, the memories...

  62. In other news... by mogrify · · Score: 3, Funny

    GM will soon discontinue all models based on wheels carved from solid blocks of stone. AT&T has begun phasing out its line of telegraph equipment in favor of more versatile communications technology. Bed Bath and Beyond will no longer carry Black & Decker's butter churns or bellows, and the US NIST Division of Weights and Measures has recommended that hogsheads, cubits, and ells no longer be used in official government documents.

    --
    perl -e 'foreach(values %SIG){$_="IGNORE";}while(){}'
  63. Cisco still uses them. by zerofoo · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I've got PIX firewalls built around socket 370 Celeron variants of the Pentium II. The slowest of these PIX firewalls can handle 100 times the amount of internet traffic we could ever think about affording.

    Recently Cisco moved to a 133 MHz AMD cpu in their PIX 501. Their higher end PIXes use Socket 370 Celeron and Pentium III chips.

    -ted

    1. Re:Cisco still uses them. by NerveGas · · Score: 1

      Back in the day when Livingston Portmaster 3's were still lots and lots of money, I opened one up and saw that they were based around a 40 MHz AMD 486-clone.

      steve

      --
      Oh, you're not stuck, you're just unable to let go of the onion rings.
  64. Because there are better designs by Sycraft-fu · · Score: 1

    If you want a slow, cheap processor, there are ones like the Via C3 out there that will do a much better job. The P2 isn't a good design, by today's standards. It's quite physically large, uses a lot of power compared to what it gets done, costs more due to outboard L2 cache, and uses a larger fabrication process than is common.

    So if you are designing a low performance system today, there are just better choices. My first recommendation would be a P3 Coppermine. They are cheap, very small, and quite energy efficient in additon to having fairly good performance. If that's still too expensive or hot then the C3 is where to look. You can even go lower than that and get a National Semi/AMD Geode which is a 486-Pentium class processor that doesn't need even a passive heatsink.

    It just gets to be time to retire designs after a certian amount of time, because it can just be done better/cheaper/faster/etc. As an extreme example, take old vaccuum tube computers. The later models were generally as powerful as a high-end programmable or low-end graphing calculators. While that level of performance is still useful for many applications, it's easy to see why the tube-mainframe design has been retired in favour of TI or HP calculators.

    1. Re:Because there are better designs by cburley · · Score: 1
      it's easy to see why the tube-mainframe design has been retired in favour of TI or HP calculators.

      And that's why computing now sounds harsh and brittle, instead of warm and smooth like it used to.

      --
      Practice random senselessness and act kind of beautiful.
  65. This is old news... by toofast · · Score: 1

    I have RIP running on my Pentium II for several years now.

  66. Question: Why do they do this? by LionKimbro · · Score: 1

    I've heard that the most expensive part of making chips is the factory. I understand that the factories are custom made for only that one chip that they make.

    If that's true, why destroy the old factory? Why not build a new factory for the new chips?

    1. Re:Question: Why do they do this? by Algan · · Score: 1

      I would guess it's because of the economics: at some point, the cost of running a factory becomes greater than the profit that particular line of chips brings in. Even though the chips themselves don't cost much to produce, the plant has some fixed costs associated with it - think lease, utilities, payroll. Plus, real estate is hard to find in some places, thus they might want to reuse it...

      I not sure they destroy the factory, they just reengineer the whole production line. Granted, the costs are immense, but still, it's not like they tear down the building...

      --
      If con is the opposite of pro, is Congress the opposite of progress?
    2. Re:Question: Why do they do this? by drbradfo · · Score: 1

      Fabs consist of a building and the machinery inside. The machinery is designed to produce one silicon process technology, not just on line of chips. Once a new process technology comes on line, the fabs are 'retooled' with new machinery to produce new chips. Older process technologies are used to build less premium chips like i/o hubs and networking chips. Once a silcon process technology becomes to far out of date, chips are no longer produced. Intel probably hasn't produced a wafer of PII chips in years, they are just shipping ones from inventory (and those are probably just limited warranty replacements).

  67. Why it's called the Pentium by dr_db · · Score: 1

    The real reason they called it Pentium is they could not trademark 486, 586, etc as a name. They were fighting AMD in court over this during the era of the 486, and lost, hence the next processor was the Pentium. Of course, most people would not be able to determine what greek value is next, hence the Pentium 2, Pentium 3, etc.

    1. Re:Why it's called the Pentium by yorkpaddy · · Score: 1

      I remember that. I'm sure though, with the deterioration of copyright/trademark law they could now patent 586. Its a hard call to figure out if anyone could figure out the hexium is a succesor to the pentium. The suffix is the same. Then again "No one ever went broke underestimating the inteligence of the American people" - HL MENCKEN

      --
      "brxref .k.p ,.by xprt. gbe.p.oycmaycbi yd. cby.nci.bj. ru yd. am.pcjab lgxlcj" don'
  68. Confirmed via anecdotal evidence by Nurgled · · Score: 1

    Indeed. One of my desktop machines here has a Pentium 2 350MHz in it, while my Dell laptop contains a mobile 366MHz chip. Also, the motherboard in the 350MHz box can only take Pentium 2 chips, up to 450MHz.

    (It's nice to know that my two main PCs are now officially "old"! Maybe I'll upgrade in a couple of years...)

  69. Celeron 300A by cttforsale · · Score: 1

    My daughter's ( 2 year old ) system is my old Celeron beige box...

    Specs:
    - Celeron 300A OC'd to 450 (100mhz FSB)
    - geforce2 mx400 agp
    - abit bh6 mobo
    - 384 mb ram
    - 12 gb HD
    - 15" compaq monitor

    It runs "Winnie the Pooh baby" and "Reader Rabbit" like stink...

    If I had a spare sloket card and a Celeron 1000 FCPA chip, that puppy would be push 1.2 ghz. Keeping my eyes open...

    1. Re:Celeron 300A by mobby_6kl · · Score: 1

      Heh, I've an very similar system in the next room:

      - Pentium II 350, can OC to 430 without problems
      - Same geforce2, but from Elsa
      - Intel SE-BX2
      - 384 Megs of ram: 64(Sumsung) + 64 (noname) + 256 (kingmax)
      - 2x10gb WD Caviars
      - 15" unknown monitor

      I have a spare P3 1000, but I can't use it because of differet power req.

  70. Misinformation!!! by lxt518052 · · Score: 5, Informative
    From the article:
    That the part has held on for so long, past the introduction of the Pentium III and the P4, is a sign of its appeal to manufacturers of embedded systems for which high clock speeds and commensurately high power consumption and heat dissipation figures are a problem.

    It does imply that embedded system manufacturers choose PII over PIII for better power efficiency and less heat generated.

    However, it is not a fact. PII simply generates more heat than same frequency PIII and is slower of course. That is partly because of PII's higher core voltage. Each time Intel or AMD introduces new CPU cores, they tend to lower the core voltage in respect to the predecessors, a result of shrinking the transistor size. Without achiving this, they wouldn't be able to put more transistors on the die or avoid the generated heat from burning the core.

    I have once put a PIII 450MHz into my old PII box to replace the 233MHz CPU. Since the mobo doesn't support 100MHz FSB, the PIII is runing at 300MHz with a 66MHz FSB. It used to require a fan to cool the PII. Now I can simply use only heat sink to cool it passively. Needless to say, I'm quite happy with it.

    --
    People who dislike China tend to mention Tiananmen Square a lot, but they always forget the Tank Man is also a Chinese.
    1. Re:Misinformation!!! by ThurstonMoore · · Score: 1

      According to information at http://developer.intel.com/design/intarch/pentiumi i/pentiumii.htm the current Pentium II's being manufactured are not the same beasts that used to run so hot. These P II's have 256k on die cache and disipate 9.8 and 11.3W @ 266MHz and 333MHz.

    2. Re:Misinformation!!! by lxt518052 · · Score: 1
      Yeah, they are rid of the cumbersome slot 1 package as well. These were meant to be PII mobile edition.

      According to this posthttp://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=131963&cid =11020014(a bit lazy to verify the source ;), even desktop PIIIs with much higher frequency can do nearly as low power consumption as these PII embedded. That's when they're working at full speed. Imagine what happens when you just underclock the FSB to 66MHz! That means both better performance and lower power consumption. And what about PIII mobile?

      There is no point to keep PII in embedded systems for power consumption reason. The guy apparently made a mistake.

      --
      People who dislike China tend to mention Tiananmen Square a lot, but they always forget the Tank Man is also a Chinese.
  71. We hardly knew ye by dbretton · · Score: 1


    I'll never forget you!

    We'll always have ebay...

  72. I have a dual myself. --3 by Ayanami+Rei · · Score: 1

    Dual PPro 200, and a dual PII Xeon.
    I loves them both, but I can't keep 'em on, it gets too hot in here. -_-

    --
    THIS THING CAN TURN ON A DIME, MACROSSZERO STYLE ALSO FUCK BETA, ~NYORON
  73. PII can be too much for some applications by gosand · · Score: 1
    For desktop use, yes, they are horribly slow by todays standards. But for simple embedded solutions, they can at times be considered overkill. Ex: When I get around to putting a mediapc under my drivers seat... I have no need or desire for a chip whose clock is measured in Ghz, simply because its far more power (heat and draw) than I need to play mp3s and basic custom software.

    I am sure some people will advocate turning these PIIs into firewalls or whatnot. I have a couple PIIs at home, but didn't use them for my firewall. Why? Not necessary and too noisy. A firewall doesn't need the horsepower, and PIIs still have processor fans. I used an old Pentium for my firewall, as it doesn't need a cpu fan. It only has a heatsink on it. The only sound from the machine is from the power supply, which is very quiet.

    But I have two PIIs that aren't doing anything, and I honestly don't know what to do with them. They aren't complete systems, so nobody really wants them as donations. I don't even think it is worth my time to auction them off on eBay. I also have a complete dual-Pentium mobo and gigantic 530W PS from a Compaq Proliant server.

    Maybe in a year or two, I'll be able to build a complete mini-system inside those PII chips. :-)

    --

    My beliefs do not require that you agree with them.

    1. Re:PII can be too much for some applications by Reziac · · Score: 1

      Probably worth about $5 on ebay, if you get any takers.

      But that sort of "old junk" is quite welcome at my house, and often finds itself with a Real Job. (My luggable is a lowly P120, how picky can I be? :)

      Personally I can't see trashing working hardware, even antiques. It's always good for *something*.

      --
      ~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
  74. Nooooooo!!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What will I use to test my diamond tipped drill bits?! I guess I'll have to see how the pentium 4 holds up, while my AMDs sleep soundly in the computers around me.

  75. ::gasp:: by Ayanami+Rei · · Score: 2, Funny

    huggles for dual sparcstation 20! Her SBUS is soo kyoot...
    And did it come with the side-loading CD-ROM?

    --
    THIS THING CAN TURN ON A DIME, MACROSSZERO STYLE ALSO FUCK BETA, ~NYORON
    1. Re:::gasp:: by bplipschitz · · Score: 1

      huggles for dual sparcstation 20! Her SBUS is soo kyoot...
      And did it come with the side-loading CD-ROM?


      Why, yes it did! But, I couldn't open it because I couldn't wrestle the box out of your widdle handsies. . .

  76. Slightly OT question by fgb · · Score: 1

    A couple of years ago I was looking at my brother in law's machine to see what I could do to upgrade it. It was a Gateway Pentium II system, or at least that's what it said on the case. When I opened it I saw that the processor had an FPGA form-factor. I had thought all PII's were slot 1. Also, when it booted the BIOS said it was running at 166Mhz.

    So, was there really a 166Mhz FPGA Pentium II or did Gateway pull a fast one?

    1. Re:Slightly OT question by acidrain69 · · Score: 1

      I'm not really an authority on this, but from my recollection, the P2 started at 233mhz (or was it 266?) on the Slot 1 form factor. The first were models with a 66mhz bus, then there were a few with 100mhz busses, going up to 450mhz. P3's came in at that speed as well, and after a few iterations of slot chips, they switched back to the socket370. I'm not sure about the celerons. I know the early ones started at 266 and 300 with no cache, then the ones with less cache than a P2 came out, and I lost track after that. AMD was better by then.

      You should run Linux on it (if you aren't already) and check /proc/cpuinfo and see what it reports the CPU as.

      My guess is that it is in the worng case or the sticker was switched. Pentium I's went from 75mhz-233mhz, so that seems more logical.

      --
      -- Having a Creationist Museum is like having an Atheist place of worship
    2. Re:Slightly OT question by keeboo · · Score: 1

      Actually the Pentium Is went from 60MHz-233MHz (AFAIR the 60/66s were still using 5v and, back then, people were shocked on how much heat they dissipated).

      The Pentium Pro (PII minus MMX, remember?), though, started at 166MHz (up to 200MHz AFAIR)... It could be that processor but a desktop-class computer using Pentium Pro i find it unlikely.

      Probably it's a Pentium I machine, agreed.

    3. Re:Slightly OT question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, to nit pick, the Pentium Pro started at 150 MHz. I had a really cool old DEC workstation that had a 150 Mhz Pro on a daughterboard that could be swapped out to use an Alpha without changing any other hardware.

  77. The follow ups to the PII... by Ayanami+Rei · · Score: 1

    Katmai and Coppermine PIIIs are superior to the PII and are mostly backwards compatible electrically (but not socket-wise). Besides, the PII slot sucked, no one wants to use it now.
    The earlier PIIIs are essentially the same CPU with an onboard cache, taking less power, while running a good deal faster. Oh, and they have more convienent packages, perfect for embedded systems and whatnot.

    The PII doesn't have a market except for replacing existing parts in systems that were, at the time, cutting edge.

    --
    THIS THING CAN TURN ON A DIME, MACROSSZERO STYLE ALSO FUCK BETA, ~NYORON
  78. It began with "Netcraft Confirms: BSD is dying" by Ayanami+Rei · · Score: 0

    More information, examples:
    http://hiro-tan.org/~ekoontz/IsDying/

    NetCraft lists web server details for various sites you ask it about on a periodic basis. It keeps statistics about operating system, web server version, etc.

    It is often used as a reference when people argue about Apache vs. IIS, Solaris vs. Linux vs. Windows on server superiority issues.

    Some troll turned that into "evidence" that the *BSDs were on their way out. It has been copied and memed and mimic'd ever since.

    --
    THIS THING CAN TURN ON A DIME, MACROSSZERO STYLE ALSO FUCK BETA, ~NYORON
  79. It's okay... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I still have my old i486 DX-2 processor. Whenever I want to take a trip down memory lane (albeit, bad memories), I still have my 486.

  80. I think you might appreciate this. by Ayanami+Rei · · Score: 1

    http://www.wakachan.org/os/src/1102144707486.png

    --
    THIS THING CAN TURN ON A DIME, MACROSSZERO STYLE ALSO FUCK BETA, ~NYORON
  81. Only a retard... by Pii · · Score: 1
    ...would pay a large premium on an identical piece of equipment, just to avoid a logo/badge.

    When discussing product loyalty, always remember that loyalty begins at home. Your first obligation is to protect your own interests. Nobody else is going to do it for you.

    --
    For those that would die defending it, Freedom
    has a sweet taste that the protected will never know.
    1. Re:Only a retard... by UniverseIsADoughnut · · Score: 2, Interesting

      No, its called people with taste. A retard would go to GAP and pay 50 bucks for a T-shirt witch a giant gab logo all over it, when they could get the same shirt without the GAP logo for 10 bucks at a differant store.

      If you haven't noticed, the more highquality a product is, the less logo and badging it has on it. Simply because not slapping your logo all over things is part of quality. People will pay to not be some big tacky billboard for a product. If I'm making a purchase of a large price, i don't care how good something is if it looks like a turd, I'm not buying it. Why do you think apple can sell a monitor with same panel in it as other companies use who sell it for less? Simple, taste, they make it clean looking, and that sells.

      Similar effect with cars, ever notice that cheap cars look ugly compaired to expensive cars, but the reality is it cost the same to make a car look beautiful as it does to make one look ugly, all the shape of the parts. And the more expensive ones do their looks with less.

      Oh how about computer cases, look at Lian Li cases, they really arn't that great ( I own one, it's pretty sucky). But people will buy them anyways cause it's how you get a clean looking case. All I wanted was a cheap clean small box, but they don't exist, if you go cheap you get a over styled POS. To get a simple box you have to pay more.

      This is the reality of the world. And as long as people like you decide to go for saving a few bucks to become a billboard for products, the world will be stuck in a rut of massive marketing in every freaking corner.

    2. Re:Only a retard... by Pii · · Score: 1
      We appear to be talking about different things.

      Most of the examples you cite are things where you're talking about items of disimilair quality. If the higher quality product comes at a higher price, I don't have a problem with that. Likewise, if you're willing to pay a premium to address some sense of aesthetics, I suppose that's fine too, if those are your values (though you're now talking about perceived quality, which is something that can't be objectively measured).

      The original poster described a choice in buying an identical product (two identical flat-panel monitors, same components, same performance) from one of two vendors, and selected the far more expensive of the two not because it was of better quality, but because of a bias against the Dell brand.

      Dell sells a number of rebranded Samsung flat panel monitors... The ONLY difference in appearance is that there is a Dell logo where the Samsung logo would ordinarily be. If the Samsung sells for $50 - $100 more per unit than the Identical Dell part, how on earth can you possibly justify paying the higher price?

      You can't say it's about quality... The two products roll off the same assembly line at the Samsung factory. They are equal in all respects, save one: Cost.

      Only a fool would pay more for an item than it is worth. The ignorant will attach some sort of emotional justifications, inject some sort of immeasurable "tie-breaker" criteria in order to assuage his sense of buyer's remorse, but the fact remains: He has been taken.

      Let me reiterate: If there's a geniune difference in the products being compared, and the extra money does buy you a higher degree of quality, than the increased cost may be justifiable. If, on the other hand, there is no difference between the products, you'd be a fool to pay more than you had to.

      --
      For those that would die defending it, Freedom
      has a sweet taste that the protected will never know.
  82. Oh No! by Jozer99 · · Score: 1

    Then what am I going to put into my next workstation!?!

  83. mode parent up! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    troll and offtopic, but cute!

  84. Those were not the clock rates by Zo0ok · · Score: 1

    I remember no PII at 366 or 466Mhz. But there were PIIs at 350, 400 and 450MHz. Are those discontinued as well? There were Celerons at 366/400/433/466 though...

    Not that I read the article...

  85. Now for something completely different by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The Dead Collector: Bring out yer dead.
    [a man puts a body on the cart]
    Large Man with Dead Body: Here's one.
    The Dead Collector: That'll be ninepence.
    The Dead Body That Claims It Isn't: I'm not dead.
    The Dead Collector: What?
    Large Man with Dead Body: Nothing. There's your ninepence.
    The Dead Body That Claims It Isn't: I'm not dead.
    The Dead Collector: 'Ere, he says he's not dead.
    Large Man with Dead Body: Yes he is.
    The Dead Body That Claims It Isn't: I'm not.
    The Dead Collector: He isn't.
    Large Man with Dead Body: Well, he will be soon, he's very ill.
    The Dead Body That Claims It Isn't: I'm getting better.
    Large Man with Dead Body: No you're not, you'll be stone dead in a moment.
    The Dead Collector: Well, I can't take him like that. It's against regulations.
    The Dead Body That Claims It Isn't: I don't want to go on the cart.
    Large Man with Dead Body: Oh, don't be such a baby.
    The Dead Collector: I can't take him.
    The Dead Body That Claims It Isn't: I feel fine.
    Large Man with Dead Body: Oh, do me a favor.
    The Dead Collector: I can't.
    Large Man with Dead Body: Well, can you hang around for a couple of minutes? He won't be long.
    The Dead Collector: I promised I'd be at the Robinsons'. They've lost nine today.
    Large Man with Dead Body: Well, when's your next round?
    The Dead Collector: Thursday.
    The Dead Body That Claims It Isn't: I think I'll go for a walk.
    Large Man with Dead Body: You're not fooling anyone, you know. Isn't there anything you could do?
    The Dead Body That Claims It Isn't: I feel happy. I feel happy.
    [the Dead Collector glances up and down the street furtively, then silences the Body with his a whack of his club]
    Large Man with Dead Body: Ah, thank you very much.
    The Dead Collector: Not at all. See you on Thursday.
    Large Man with Dead Body: Right.

  86. Still using.... by shadowsurfr1 · · Score: 1

    I'm still using one to run my website off of. An extremely old dell with a PII.

  87. Would anyone like by doombob · · Score: 1

    Would anyone enjoy some fine Intel collector's items?

    Pentium II's on sale

  88. It's for the best, really by Corellon+Larethian · · Score: 1

    And that article should read June of 2005.

  89. No reasons to buy P2s by wayward_son · · Score: 1

    Don't get me wrong, P2 systems still have plenty of uses, but I would never buy a P2 chip.

    The P3-500 is a better, cooler, chip for only a few dollars more and is a drop-in replacement for a P2. Celerons are cheap and plentiful. You can get a much better chip for about the same price.

    This is why 5x86's (actually just pimped-out 486's) are still being made, but the PII is on it's way out.

  90. The pentium II goes down by PhaxMohdem · · Score: 1

    Well, the second member of the P6 family is nearing its end. You will still have to pry my Dual 1MB Pentium Pro's out of my cold dead fingers though. I will never give up that system for any thing! *tear*

    --

    The Property of One's : "The Oneitude is directly proportional to the Colditude of the one." - S.B.

  91. An old old Star Trek game... by devphil · · Score: 1


    ...that I watched a friend play on his Commodore (rock on in 16 colors!) had two members of an away team exploring some abandoned computer room of the far future.

    The line (printed on screen, of course, not recorded audio) was something like, "look at this ancient 801286, it's like a museum piece."

    I, with my 8086 clone, was not amused.

    --
    You cannot apply a technological solution to a sociological problem. (Edwards' Law)
  92. RIP by anonymous22 · · Score: 1

    This is so sad I am crying my eyes out. Intel will no longer make the worlds best processor besides the Pentium III, Pentium 4, Athlon, Athlon XP,...

    --
    Anyone who runs is V.C. Anyone who stands still is well-disciplined V.C.
    Door Gunner, Full Metal Jacket
  93. Cool! by Grendel+Drago · · Score: 1

    Wow. That's an impressive list.

    Weird, imagining the most powerful CPUs available taking less than a watt of power, compared to a shiny new Pentium IV eating more than a hundred.

    --grendel drago

    --
    Laws do not persuade just because they threaten. --Seneca
    1. Re:Cool! by evilviper · · Score: 1
      Weird, imagining the most powerful CPUs available taking less than a watt of power

      I can't remember ever seeing or hearing of any x86 processor using less than a watt. Perhaps I don't understand your point here.
      --
      Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
  94. PII by halcyon1234 · · Score: 1

    They still make PIIs? Wow, you learn something new every day.

  95. Slower and hotter by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    An 80486 DX4 66 fanless.

    I know it's a joke. Just couldn't resist it. ;)

  96. Not too disappointed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    My Pentium 1.999999995478423897543 is still in working order

  97. In other news... by Erik+Hollensbe · · Score: 1

    Intel gives a press release on 2 June, 2006, saying "Oops, we killed the Pentium III fab too, on accident."

  98. 576 would have been nice by mnmn · · Score: 1

    There was the 386, and then, there was the 376. The 376 didnt have 16-bit parts, a different booting method, and was much simpler with the same performance as the other fatter one.Remove the silly protected mode and 16-bit silliness, and you have a lean, fast chip to which you could port Windows, and not feel bad about IBM not choosing the m68k for the PC.

    Intel had a real chance there. They had already given out IP to cyrix, rise, amd, which would later compete and beat them. Restart life as 376, patented and all, and suddenly copying you becomes difficult again, and you hold all the IP.

    I now wonder if the Athlon64 still has a hardware-implemented 16-bit protected mode to boot from. There must be a piece of 8086 somewhere on that huge chip, a piece we can really do without.

    I think market forces will ensure that 20 years from now when we're booting the multicore,multicell quantum optical chip, somewhere deep inside an 8086 still lurks, with the complete instruction set, and Robert Browns DOS interrupt list (#21?), just to bring the monolith back to life, switch it to 32-bits, and a late-90s code to switch it to full 64-bits, and awaken the other cores/cells.

    --
    "Give orange me give eat orange me eat orange give me eat orange give me you." -Nim Chimpsky
  99. Does Intel still make 586's? (pentiums) by FadedTimes · · Score: 1

    I know 586's are used on some NMS AG-Series T1/E1 PCI cards for Telecommunications network connections. AG 4040 boards
    Lower end AG cards from NMS use 486's on PCI cards for Analog and Ditigal Telecommunication connections.

  100. PII + 440BX = Height of stability? by Krellan · · Score: 1

    I've owned nearly a dozen Pentium-II systems over the years (they just keep falling into my hands somehow), and I must say they seem to represent the height of PC stability and reliability. The Intel 440BX chipset has been rock-solid.

    Motherboard designs around the time of the Pentium-II were at a fairly stable point in PC history. PCI and AGP were established, SDRAM modules were getting standardized and more affordable, and USB was getting ironed out. I've seen newer systems crash more often, as they seem to be made less robust (stricter thermal requirements, newer designs, mismatched components, and so on).

    The Pentium-II CPU and Intel 440BX chipset seem to be a stable rock-solid combination, and this platform provides just enough speed to be useful for casual purposes (web browser, email, word processor, MP3 player, and so on). It makes an excellent "second PC" to have around the house as a spare. So, these systems should continue to be common and perform well for years to come!

    1. Re:PII + 440BX = Height of stability? by taradfong · · Score: 1

      I second this, except to go so far to say an even better combo is the coppermine PIII's, which also run on 440BX boards. You can overclock the heck out of these, especially the 100 Mhz bus ones.

      --
      Does it hurt to hear them lying? Was this the only world you had?
  101. My point exactly. by Grendel+Drago · · Score: 1

    Well, neither had I, but there they were, on the page the grandparent post referred to. The 386SX-16 used 0.75W typical, 1.1W peak. Technically, at no point was it the fastest chip Intel made (it was a budgetty chip made to be cheaper), and peak wattage was above 1.0W, but I still think it's damned impressive. Also, note the 486SX-25 (208 pin package), which used 0.82W typical, 1.04W max.

    Is that what you were asking about?

    --grendel drago

    --
    Laws do not persuade just because they threaten. --Seneca