533a@948 How fast is it?

MTDEW

Diamond Member
Oct 31, 1999
4,283
4
91
#1
I use my pc primarily as a gaming machine & I just did a cheap upgrade to a 533a@948mhz & I was wondering just how fast this is compared to a PIII?

Of course I want the most bang for my buck, but I'd spend a few more bucks for more speed.

Does a 533a@948mhz compare to a PIII 700 or higher or what?

Heres my specs:
533a@948 1.8v
MSI Master 6905 slotket
Golden Orb
160mb pc-100 (running at CAS2)
Soyo 6BA+IV mobo
Elsa Gladiac GeForce2 GTS (32mb,AGP)
Maxtor 13.6 gb hd
SB Live Value
HP 7200e CD-RW

Would I be better off with a PIII or alternative?

I'm really curious how this sytem would stack up to the latest cpu's.

Would a PIII 800mhz whip my butt?
 

Renob

Diamond Member
Jun 18, 2000
7,597
0
76
#2
Im afraid a PIII-800 would whip your Cell-2. I have a Cell-2 566@850 and my Quake3 Fps at 800x600 every thing set to high are 93fps. I went from a PIII-450 that would only do 57fps. Now the Cell-2 is a great cheap upgrad. I sold my PIII on eebahy for $138.00 and bought my Cell-2 for $95.oo and a golden orb for $15.00 so it was a free upgrade. and the PIII-800 would cost u about $500.00 so for the price I think the Cell-2 is a better deal. Oh and by the way if U see her tell her that I love her.................................
 

Hard_Boiled

Golden Member
Oct 9, 1999
1,154
0
0
#3
A celeron at 950 would be about equal to a PIII 800 I would say, faster in some things too. To say a PIII 800 whips it is not right. RenoB, his chip is 100 mhz faster than yours, not to mention the FSB is about 120 compared to 100. Now a PIII 650 overclocked to 866 or so, that would be faster.

I think alot of it depends on the program you're running. 3DMark really seems to like the P3's, I guess the extra cache helps alot. My friend has a P3 at 923, and he gets about 190-200 fps in q3 demo001 with his config. Using his same config I got 160-170 with my celeron 566@935. Believe me, your cpu can keep pace with a P3 800 just fine.
 

Ulysses

Platinum Member
Jun 17, 2000
2,136
0
0
#4
Take a look at http://www.anandtech.com/printarticle.html?i=1264, where there are a lot of comparisons of an overclocked Celeron II 700 to various other CPU's. The relative differences should tell you something.

I believe you are asking precisely the right question for when comparing platforms- it's just that the answer is difficult to determine.

In the review I think page 8 is very revealing for gamers. You will notice right away why the Duron has gotten such raves. The Duron stock 700/KT133 beats the C2 700 @ 850/100/BX, at least in that benchmark, and the P3 600 @ 600/133/i815 is even better. The P3 600/100/BX is worse.

It is probably better to compare using application benchmark tests rather than theoretical synthetic benchmarks, if you are interested in real world performance. The synthetics are helpful to understand why the app benchmarks turn out as they do.
 

MTDEW

Diamond Member
Oct 31, 1999
4,283
4
91
#5
Naturally I'd like to believe Hard_Boiled's post.

But benchmarking is so hard to do with so many different pc configs & tweaks out there.
I get 107fps in the QuakeIII timedemo 1 800x600x32 High Quality settings, thats with my non-tweaked GeForce2 548mhz & sound on.

I wish the link above had a 533@948 on the chart cuz as Hard_Boiled
mentioned, I'm at a 118mhz fsb & 100mhz faster than the celeron2 @ 850mhz.
So my bus & cpu are faster than an 850mhz Celeron 2.

On the QuakeIII 640x480x16 settings like used in the tests from the
link above I get 115fps @ 948mhz and 116.4 fps at 960mhz.
Not much of a performance jump from a 118fsb to a 120 fsb & an extra 12mhz.

According to that chart that puts me somewhere between a PIII600 & Athlon 700 but I'm using the Det.5.32 drivers so its hard to make comparisons.(See what I mean about different configs?)

Oh well, as usual I feel the need for more speed, this is my main hobby & I'd like to keep up to the current cpus. (performance wise)

I guess I'll have to start saving my pennies again & upgrade as high as I can afford next time instead of taking the cheap way out.

I was always jealous of you guys with 300a's @ 450mhz while I had a stock PII 400 & I paid twice as much for less performance.
Now it seems I should have stuck to a stock PIII this time instead of trying to join the OC'ing trend.

Live & Learn I guess.

P.S.
I'm not complaining about my 533@948's performance, I'm VERY pleased,
but as I'm sure most of you understand "I can't stand thinking theres something faster out there, I want cutting edge performance!"

BTW.
I run my 533a at 948 cuz at 960 I have to use 1.87v to keep it stable & I'm afraid to risk frying my cpu and/or video card.(its only 1fps faster anyway)
 
Oct 14, 1999
11,607
0
76
#6
But at 948mHz you crack RC5-64 blocks equal to a P!!!-950mHz. :)
 
Mar 21, 2000
693
0
0
#7
just curious, i just web (ie5.5), play mp3's, download and burn warez,maybe all at the same time.

Is the PIII Really gonna be that much faster with me? I don't play games or crack rc-5, so whats the real world performance gonna matter in my applications?

I know i can download, browse web, play mp3's and burn cd's all at the same time with my celeron 566 @ 850, without any stagger or lag. The only thing that is slow is the whole hard drive (13 gig 5400 rpm piecer) that i've got. With the money i've saved by choose the celeron II over the p3, i used that to buy a 15 gig deskstar 75gxp ibm 7200 rpm drive, which i hear is very fast. I think for the bucks, id rather have a faster drive,cheaper cpu combo than just a faster cpu, since 5400 rpm is suck.

so take a look at the big picture of your system. If you're not gonna be spending big cheese on your system, theres plenty of other ways to speed it up, More ram (cheaper with celeron II vs. p3), better vid card (GEFORCE 2MX?), faster hard drive.

Consider the performance, today of the following system and cost.

Celeron II at 850
Abit BM6 mobo
128 megs pc-100
Geforce 2MX (clocked as well)
nice 7200 baracuda ATA II or IBM Deskstar 75gxp

Real cheap stuff. i bet it will save hundreds of bucks and perform quite comfortably for most users who play game (not hardcore) etc.

 
Mar 11, 2000
22,595
1
106
#8
I did all of that with a Celeron 366@412. Copy my CDs on-the-fly disc-to-disc, surf, photoshop, word, download files, all at the same time.

For your purposes, increasing your CPU speed will not be of any noticeable benefit. I bought a new CPU to better ENCODE MP3, with the added benefit of performance in games.
 


ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS