Cryix 133 mhz

reaper7534!

Limp Gawd
Joined
Feb 13, 2016
Messages
131
Did anyone ever have one of these ? I ( upgraded ) from a AMD DX4 100 mhz and it felt like I went backwards, what a miserable piece of hardware. I do believe it dropped straight into my motherboad though, maybe.
 

auntjemima

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Mar 1, 2014
Messages
6,493
It would have dropped right in if you had a socket 7 board (I don't think you needed a super socket 7, but who knows..).

I have one here. I have all the variations of Cyrix processors. I went through a collecting phase.
 

matt167

Gawd
Joined
Dec 18, 2016
Messages
930
My dad had a Cyrix 133 for a while, and a 233 ran our home server up until about the time I graduated high school in 2007
 

OFaceSIG

2[H]4U
Joined
Aug 31, 2009
Messages
2,445
I had a Cyrix 6x86 P166+ and it was GREAT for anything but gaming. Productivity was great. I later pulled it out and replaced it with a Pentium 90Mhz that was better at gaming even though the Cyrix was technically 133MHz.

My understanding is the FPU on the Cryix CPUs was just a poor implementation and therefore games suffered.
 

GiGaBiTe

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Apr 26, 2013
Messages
1,321
It would have dropped right in if you had a socket 7 board (I don't think you needed a super socket 7, but who knows..)

You'd need a Super Socket 7 board for several Cyrix CPUs that used weird bus speeds like 75 and 83 MHz which normal Socket 7 boards usually didn't have support for. Those CPUs were a PITA to get working properly because motherboards at the time usually cascaded the various bus clocks from the CPU FSB. PCI was usually CPUClk/2 so a 75 MHz bus got you 37.5 which was pretty high but generally worked. 83 MHz got you 41.5 and most PCI cards would either not function or overheat and misbehave. AGP and RAM was worse, often being run at the same speed at the FSB and AGP cards didn't at all tolerate 75 or 83 MHz clocks.

The computer tech lab when I was in high school had one machine with a Cyrix MII-333gp. It had an 83 MHz bus and ran at 250 MHz. It was slower than the Pentium 166-200 machines, ran far hotter and was VERY unstable due to the weird bus speeds. We had to install PC-100 memory to keep it from crashing every few minutes. But even then, it was still unstable. We could almost hear the motherboard crying out in pain.

My understanding is the FPU on the Cryix CPUs was just a poor implementation and therefore games suffered.

When Cyrix was designing their 686 class processors, they made the fatal error to concentrate more of the CPUs resources towards integer math and more or less used the FPU from their 486 with few changes. They were blindsided by the explosion in popularity of 3D games like Quake which was the start of their downfall. Their 686 class processors were indeed very good at integer math (hence the PR scheme) but the market moved to software with increasing reliance on a strong FPU, something which Cyrix sorely lacked.
 

auntjemima

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Mar 1, 2014
Messages
6,493
You'd need a Super Socket 7 board for several Cyrix CPUs that used weird bus speeds like 75 and 83 MHz which normal Socket 7 boards usually didn't have support for. Those CPUs were a PITA to get working properly because motherboards at the time usually cascaded the various bus clocks from the CPU FSB. PCI was usually CPUClk/2 so a 75 MHz bus got you 37.5 which was pretty high but generally worked. 83 MHz got you 41.5 and most PCI cards would either not function or overheat and misbehave. AGP and RAM was worse, often being run at the same speed at the FSB and AGP cards didn't at all tolerate 75 or 83 MHz clocks.

The computer tech lab when I was in high school had one machine with a Cyrix MII-333gp. It had an 83 MHz bus and ran at 250 MHz. It was slower than the Pentium 166-200 machines, ran far hotter and was VERY unstable due to the weird bus speeds. We had to install PC-100 memory to keep it from crashing every few minutes. But even then, it was still unstable. We could almost hear the motherboard crying out in pain.



When Cyrix was designing their 686 class processors, they made the fatal error to concentrate more of the CPUs resources towards integer math and more or less used the FPU from their 486 with few changes. They were blindsided by the explosion in popularity of 3D games like Quake which was the start of their downfall. Their 686 class processors were indeed very good at integer math (hence the PR scheme) but the market moved to software with increasing reliance on a strong FPU, something which Cyrix sorely lacked.

I'll need to take a peak at Tyan SS7 board I have in one of my retro PC's... I'm almost positive I have like 4 or 5 bus speed options via jumpers.
 

GiGaBiTe

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Apr 26, 2013
Messages
1,321
On "fancy" boards, you usually had 60, 66, 75, 83, 100 and sometimes like 102, 107 and 112 for overclocking.

I have two FIC PA-2013 boards which supports all of those bus speeds and up to a 5.5 multiplier. One of them though is an earlier revision which has a bugged VIA chipset which gets unstable over 450 MHz.
 

Burticus

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Nov 7, 2005
Messages
4,342
I had a Cyrix 6x86 P166+ and it was GREAT for anything but gaming. Productivity was great. I later pulled it out and replaced it with a Pentium 90Mhz that was better at gaming even though the Cyrix was technically 133MHz.

My understanding is the FPU on the Cryix CPUs was just a poor implementation and therefore games suffered.

Ditto. I was building a lot of systems in the 90's and the Cyrix/IBM 6x86's were dirt cheap and plenty fast for windows. But they had the world's worst FPU which made most games just crawl. I mean a p90 I had just whooped these things playing games like Wing Commander, Xwing v Tie Fighter, etc. The AMD K6 was a little better, but still not as good as Intel of the time.

This all changes later when 3D cards become mainstream, but back then it was all CPU horsepower that got gaming done.

On "fancy" boards, you usually had 60, 66, 75, 83, 100 and sometimes like 102, 107 and 112 for overclocking.

I have two FIC PA-2013 boards which supports all of those bus speeds and up to a 5.5 multiplier. One of them though is an earlier revision which has a bugged VIA chipset which gets unstable over 450 MHz.

Yeah, with JUMPER pins. I can't remember the last time I've seen those except for the front panel hookups on modern mobos.

edit - oh well CMOS jumper too I guess is about it nowadays
 

acascianelli

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Feb 25, 2004
Messages
6,889
I had a Cyrix 6x86 P166+ and it was GREAT for anything but gaming. Productivity was great. I later pulled it out and replaced it with a Pentium 90Mhz that was better at gaming even though the Cyrix was technically 133MHz.

My understanding is the FPU on the Cryix CPUs was just a poor implementation and therefore games suffered.

Same experience here too.

I had an IBM branded Cyrix 6x86L PR166+ (133mhz) and I had a friend with a Pentium 75 that would games at nearly the same or better FPS than mine. Overclocked like shit too IIRC.

I miss those early days :(

Me and that same friend built two new computers at the same time after those. He went with a AMD K6-2 450, and I went with a Celeron 433 on a 440BX. I ended up being able to crank my Celeron 433 up to 590 without a problem, and his K6-2 was never quite that stable.

That started my very long run with the 440BX chipset. Went from that Celeron 433@590, to a Celeron (Coppermine) 600@1035, then to a Celeron (Tualatin) 1.3@1.6.
 
Last edited:

GiGaBiTe

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Apr 26, 2013
Messages
1,321
Overclocked like shit too IIRC.

One reason Cyrix resorted to PR schemes is because they had a terrible time ramping up the clocks on their 6x86 architecture. The parts they binned for retail were often at the knife edge of working and not, hence overclocking generally didn't go well.

IBM was aware of this and Cyrix parts sold under their moniker were generally more conservatively rated.
 

Halon

Gawd
Joined
Aug 13, 2004
Messages
537
One reason Cyrix resorted to PR schemes is because they had a terrible time ramping up the clocks on their 6x86 architecture. The parts they binned for retail were often at the knife edge of working and not, hence overclocking generally didn't go well.

IBM was aware of this and Cyrix parts sold under their moniker were generally more conservatively rated.

Yeah, definitely true. I had good times with my 6x86 PR200+; lousy as it was for Quake and FPU-flogging games, that 150 MHz chip was really terrific for all my other DOS titles. And it was in a rock-solid Gigabyte Super7 motherboard that withstood all its bus speed weirdness without skipping a beat.

All of that said, upgrading to an Athlon 500 was mind-numbing...
 

OFaceSIG

2[H]4U
Joined
Aug 31, 2009
Messages
2,445
Same experience here too.

I had an IBM branded Cyrix 6x86L PR166+ (133mhz) and I had a friend with a Pentium 75 that would games at nearly the same or better FPS than mine. Overclocked like shit too IIRC.

I miss those early days :(

Me and that same friend built two new computers at the same time after those. He went with a AMD K6-2 450, and I went with a Celeron 433 on a 440BX. I ended up being able to crank my Celeron 433 up to 590 without a problem, and his K6-2 was never quite that stable.

That started my very long run with the 440BX chipset. Went from that Celeron 433@590, to a Celeron (Coppermine) 600@1035, then to a Celeron (Tualatin) 1.3@1.6.

Funny, I too went Celeron after my Cyrix days. But if my memory serves, it was a 440LX chipset for me.
 
Last edited:

GiGaBiTe

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Apr 26, 2013
Messages
1,321
Kinda wish I still had a Cyrix to play with. I have a couple drawers of vintage CPUs, but no Cyrix.
 
Top