Celeron 1.4 performance = Celeron 2.4 performance?

[mooojojojo]

Originally posted by: apoppin
What about the P4 2.80B (533FSB)? It's even cheaper than the 280C (800FSB)?

This looks to me to be the easiest, cheapest (and most reasonable) upgrade for an already Intel system (just R&R the CPU) . . . am I missing something?

Exactly. That's what I was thinking but I don't know how much difference it'll make. And it's still a lot of $$$ - again ~$130. Also I always thought that HT makes a world of difference and I've been somewhat reluctant to swap the CPU for one that doesn't have HT :\ I wish there were 3.06 P4s here, they had HT, right?

On a side note - there are 2GHz 400FSB P4s here, how big is the chance that I'll be able to OC it as easily as this Celeron? Just chaning the FSB to 133 instead of 100. 🙂 Thanks.

 

[Markfw]

IF you can't find a 2.4b somewhere (which actually is your cheapest out, and a GOOD option) Just do the motherboard and CPU (NF7-S and 2500 Barton). If the PSU is inadequate, you will have problems installing the OS. Then quit, and order ANY good PSU (fortron or Antec are my choices) and install again.

Edit : apoppin, we finally agree !!!!! And I think a P4 2.4b will KILL a Celeron, but I could be wrong.

 

[apoppin]

Originally posted by: mooojojojo

Originally posted by: apoppin
What about the P4 2.80B (533FSB)? It's even cheaper than the 280C (800FSB)?

This looks to me to be the easiest, cheapest (and most reasonable) upgrade for an already Intel system (just R&R the CPU) . . . am I missing something?

Exactly. That's what I was thinking but I don't know how much difference it'll make. And it's still a lot of $$$ - again ~$130. Also I always thought that HT makes a world of difference and I've been somewhat reluctant to swap the CPU for one that doesn't have HT :\ I wish there were 3.06 P4s here, they had HT, right?

On a side note - there are 2GHz 400FSB P4s here, how big is the chance that I'll be able to OC it as easily as this Celeron? Just chaning the FSB to 133 instead of 100. 🙂 Thanks.

HT makes some difference depending on ap. Less for me with Win2K.

BUT, if you are looking for a pure PERFORMANCE increase, a 2.4B (or 2.6 or 2.8 depending on budget) will BLOW-AWAY your O/C'd Celeron setup AT DEFAULT speeds. ANY of these CPUs will O/C to well over 3.0ghz anbd make your curent Celery look like it's standin still (Well . . . )

If you pick the most BUDgET P4 - get a P4 2.4B for ~$140 and sell your old CPU for $40 - can ANYONE think of a SIMPLER and more bang-for-buck performance increase for your particular system for ~$100???

Well, can you?

edit If you MUSH have HT, there is the Pentium 4 3.06GHz 533MHz for about $220 . . . that'd be a sweet upgrade for ~$180

Edit : apoppin, we finally agree !!!!! And I think a P4 2.4b will KILL a Celeron, but I could be wrong.

We have agreed before and will undoubtedly agree in the future . . . 🙂 A P4 2B ~3Ghz will MURDER his O/C'd Celery@2.66Ghz. 😀

 

[mooojojojo]

I didn't know CPUs can MURDER each other 😛

Ok, one final question perhaps. How easy an overclock are we talking about here? If i get a 400MHz FSB one - it'd be nice to reach 533FSB. And if it's 533MHz - won't I be overclocking the chipset, AGP and PCI? I don't like the idea too much.

But anyway - say I get a 400MHz and want to run it at 533MHz. Currently I don't have any case fans, nor do I know how to use thermal paste. Any chance it'll work with the stock HSF if I decide to put a fan on the back? Thanks 🙂

 

[apoppin]

Originally posted by: mooojojojo
I didn't know CPUs can MURDER each other 😛

Ok, one final question perhaps. How easy an overclock are we talking about here? If i get a 400MHz FSB one - it'd be nice to reach 533FSB. And if it's 533MHz - won't I be overclocking the chipset, AGP and PCI? I don't like the idea too much.

But anyway - say I get a 400MHz and want to run it at 533MHz. Currently I don't have any case fans, nor do I know how to use thermal paste. Any chance it'll work with the stock HSF if I decide to put a fan on the back? Thanks 🙂

Head on over to the CPU/OC'ing forum . . . ALL your questions have been answered already (try "search" or create a new topic if you need clarification).

I am not familar with your MB and whther it has an AGP/PCI lock or not (mine does and also 5:4 and 4:3 CPU:memory dividers) - you'd better be SURE before you order. ALL the P4s from 2.4-3.0 should be good o/c'ers with the retail HS/fan.

edit: Re: the Celeron-P4 contrast: I was being speaking euphemistically when I said murder . .. "slaughter" might be more apt.

 

[StageLeft]

moojojo Read This

 

[Regs]

Then get a 2500. Upgrade. Or get a 3.0c.

 

[apoppin]

Originally posted by: Skoorb
moojojo Read This

The DIFFERENCE between your upgrade and his is that you NEEDED a new MB and RAM. He doesn't.

Evidently, simply swapping in a new P4 will make a huge performance difference over his o/c'd celery.

 

[BlvdKing]

I bought my Mom a Celeron 2.4 and 512 MB of memory @ 266 MHz. She uses it for Internet and mild photoshopping. She loves that computer! Of course she was upgraded from a K6-2 350 w/ 192 MB of memory. Anyways, she thinks it is faster than my Barton 2500+ because 2400>1833. LOL!

 

[AkumaX]

Originally posted by: Markfw900

Originally posted by: apoppin

Originally posted by: Markfw900

Originally posted by: magomago

Originally posted by: apoppin
If you go NewEggs' pricing, the P4-2.80c (which I bought last month) is ~$185; the 2.4 Celery is ~$110 less.

If you doN'T have the money NOW or NEED the performance, the Celery will do fine for a year or so until the Northwood P4s are cheap - sticking in an 0/C'd 3.x+ would be a screamin' upgrade.

edit: of course, you'd O/C that 2.4 Celeron to ~3.0Ghz and it would be a decent performer NOW.

In fact, I am looking to do a similar upgrade path next year, when 3.4Ghz is starting to seem slow . . . I am quite certain the last of the Northwoods will be cheap next year AND O/C to well over 4.0 Ghz. 😉

What I don't get is WHY would you want a 2.4 Celeron for ~75, when you could get a 2500+ that will murder the Celeron for virtually the same price? You'd have to have a HUGE Vendetta against AMD to do that, especially considering the price and preformance. Hell, go get a 1700+ for cheaper if we wanna be stingy, that'll still cream the Celeron.

Yea, by his own quote, I was trying to say the same thing, and he said I "took it out of context" I still don't understand why you would throw away the $75 (who would want it 6 months later, they are crap now) instead of buying something that will actually last a year or two THAT IS STILL UPGRADEABLE.

I agree with the vendetta comment.....

i also agree that you don't get it.

😀

OK, so you buy a $75 Celeron cause thats all you can afford. Six months later you buy a faster P4 to put in it place. Then you try to sell the crap Celeron to somebody and can't (unless you find a moron), so you have wasted $75.

Aside from the fact you might be able to sell the CPU, which I agree might happen, what exactly is it that I don't get ? Why people like to waste money ? Why you are in Intel fanboy who would rather buy and throw away a CPU, or sell it to a moron==eBay, than buy one you could actuallly use at twice the speed in the meantime ? Oh, I forgot, then you would have to spend $25-50 on a motherboard that would support AMD processors, and you can't have that.... It might even be upgradable, and then you would have to buy another AMD processor....

everyone knows 2400 >>>> 1833... 😛

 

[AIWGuru]

Nonsense . . . they ALWAYS qualify their statements regarding specific CPUs, unlike the fanboys.

Right now there is very little difference price vs perf in a 2.80C Intel System and an AMB 64 3000+ (assuming you O/C) . . .it comes down to your PREFERENCES and what apps you run.

I know this wasn't directed at me but DID YOU EVER READ WHAT WAS WRITTEN!? They were clearly talking about celerons vs low end athlon XPs. I'm not sure how your 2.8c P4 factors into that. That's right, it doesn't.

 

[apoppin]

Originally posted by: AIWGuru

Nonsense . . . they ALWAYS qualify their statements regarding specific CPUs, unlike the fanboys.

Right now there is very little difference price vs perf in a 2.80C Intel System and an AMB 64 3000+ (assuming you O/C) . . .it comes down to your PREFERENCES and what apps you run.

I know this wasn't directed at me but DID YOU EVER READ WHAT WAS WRITTEN!? They were clearly talking about celerons vs low end athlon XPs. I'm not sure how your 2.8c P4 factors into that. That's right, it doesn't.

you certainly don't read what I write . . . outta context again . .. 😛

THIS is what my reply was directed to (NOT to Tom's or Anand's article):

Originally posted by: Regs
Anand.com and tomshardware both said it, AMD is the best bang for your buck on a budget. No Ifs -ands- or buts. Stability? Get a ASUS Nforce 2 or a Soltek KT400 with a 50 dollar XP 1800 and you got youself some rock hard stability.

 

[BlvdKing]

LOL you're right.

everyone knows 2400 >>>> 1833... 😛

 

[AIWGuru]

apoppin, yes I know that but you were responding to someone who WAS referring to both of those celeron reviews. Do you get it now?

 

[Cerb]

Originally posted by: Eug

Originally posted by: mooojojojo

Originally posted by: apoppin
The 2.4 Celeron is NOT a "slow" machine for a non-gamer (non-encoder).

Exactly! 🙂 It's not like I (or anyone for that matter) would turn down a P4 upgrade, but sometimes people do want to go with Intel and they do want to stay on budget.

That's just it. I was checking out the pricing and it turns out the P4 2.8C costs $160 at Pricewatch, and the Celeron 2.8 costs $128.

Over the cost of an entire brand new computer, a $32 upgrade seems like nothing - may as well go for the P4.

Apoppin's right about the $75 2.4 GHz Celeron, but even then it's only an $85 difference, compared to 2.8 GHz P4C. (She's looking to spend about $1000 for the computer.)

$1000 and a celeron was even considered!? For ay more than a $600 prebuilt POS, a celeron should not be tought of. At all.

 

[Cerb]

Originally posted by: mooojojojo

Originally posted by: AIWGuru

Originally posted by: Acanthus

Originally posted by: AIWGuru
Sorry mooooojojojo but the era that your 933mhz P3 is from is the problem, not the processor itself. It's going to be stuck with a slower chipset and a hard drive from that time period (which made for a much less responsive or snappy system.) It could have been a slot 1 processor for all we know which doesn't even have on die cache.
In addition to all of the system level benefits a modern 1.4Ghz celeron has (these celerons are just like P3s - same ammount of cache) it's also got 50% more clock speed than the P3 you're comparing it to.

My sister bought herself an emachine with a celeron 1.8ghz and it's the slowest thing I've ever seen. It takes about 3 seconds to pull up the start menu. At first I attributed it to the 128MB of ram so she's up to 512MB now and it's just as bad. It could be the 5400rpm hard drive but I doubt it would make that much of a difference. This system is just dog slow and my 1ghz athlon is much, much faster.

There were slot1 on coppermines. I had a 550E and a 750E both slot 1 with on die cache.

Yes, but didn't they use a slocket adapter? I had a dual P3 board which used two coppermines in slocket adapters.
Anyway, the point is that for all he knows it could be an off-die cache chip.

I'm pretty sure there are no off-die cache P3 Coppermines. The last Pentiums with off-die cache IIRC were the Katmai P3s, which topped out at 600MHz. Also - the chipset the P3 is using is the same that the Tualatin Celeron uses (in reply to your previous post), and the FSB of the stock Celeron is 100MHz vs. 133 on the P3. I'm not sure you got the idea of the discussion. The thing in question is whether the Celeron 1.4 is as fast as 2.4GHz.

On a side note I don't think you'll be able to tell the difference between a Celeron 2.4 and an Athlon 2000+ without pulling out some benchmark or FPS counter. 😉

Some of you people are just too patient, IMO.
I noticed a difference from a 1800+/KT333 and a 1800+/NF2, with single-channel 256MB RAM, 5400 RPM HD, no overclocking, no OS reinstall (that came a few weeks later for a different reason), etc.
That is, I noticed a significant difference just running Firebird and using explorer.
There's no way I could stand a P4 Celeron, and couldn't recommed one either. My own experiences and the general use business winstone results have matched up far too closely since I had my Duron, and was able to actually compare with P4s. Durons aren't great but at last they don't cost a more for being worse.

A7N8X-X: $70
PC2700 RAM (if needed): $40-$70
2500+: $80
and worst case...Fortron 300w PSU: $32

...not bad at all, and that's not even going with rock-bottom stuff.

 

[mooojojojo]

Cerb, have you actually used a P4 Celeron? And I mean a properly setup Celeron, not your sister's or your parents' PC. 😉 I think that if you give a non-enthusiast regular person even a Barton 2500+ they'll manage to bog it down with useless applications, toolbars or spyware.

BTW - the RAM you quoted, that's the price for a 256MB stick or 512MB stick?

 

[Eug]

Originally posted by: Cerb
$1000 and a celeron was even considered!? For ay more than a $600 prebuilt POS, a celeron should not be tought of. At all.

Well, part of that was DVI plus DVI LCD.

 

[Cerb]

Originally posted by: Eug

Originally posted by: Cerb
$1000 and a celeron was even considered!? For ay more than a $600 prebuilt POS, a celeron should not be tought of. At all.

Well, part of that was DVI plus DVI LCD.

Right, but then you're buying new, and a 2500+ would be plenty and beat any celeron.
As far as upgade paths go, don't expect one either way. As fast technology is changin, chances are for $200-$300 you'd b able to get a mobo/CPU (and maybe RAM) upgrade to blow away a pure CPU/RAM upgrade, and then you'll want a new gadget and it will be PCI-Express...whoops! No current system support!

 

[AkumaX]

wanna cheap combo? duron 1.6 + kt333 mobo for $35 at frys.