Okay, well I used to be a gamer pre-Pentium 4 and loved games like the original Half Life [the only FPS I've ever loved, a part from Halo (XBX)], StarCraft, WarCraft II and the Command and Conquer, basically any RTS. Then the Xbox came around and I just found it too expensive to keep PC-Gaming, so I did the inevitable and for the last five years I've been living off Dells just surfing the net and downloading.
Well anyway, I went over to a mates house on the weekend and played some WarCraft III and C&C: Generals - Zero Hour and woah, I was really impressed. Now I dont want a fully blown beast that can play F.E.A.R, Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion etc, basically I'd like to be able to play said titles (WC3/C&C:ZH) at their peak along with some of the newer 3D-RTS titles (Maybe a littleRome: Total War) and some Counter Strike: Source. Anyway yeah, I've currently got a Mobo which only takes Socket-478 CPU's, so that kind of limits me to the newer Celeron D's. I figured that I'd go with a Celeron D as its cheaper and I'll most probably be purchasing a new "beast" for Vista etc early next year, so cheaper means I'll have more cash for when Vista arrives.
Im currently running a Pentium 4 (Northwood) 2.0Ghz (512k L2, 8k L1). So would the Celeron D (350, Prescott) 3.2Ghz (256k L2, 16k L1) perform better in a gaming sense? The benchmark seems to agree with me, just making sure, I've had a fiddle with one at general tasks (starting up applications, responsiveness) and they seem alot more stable and generally faster. Furthermore, does anyone know if the Celeron D's are compatible with the Intel 845G chipset?
I've read the Celeron D (335) 2.8Ghz review/benchmark (HERE) and it seems very capable of running the titles im interested in (WC3 - 43+ FPS, C&C:ZH - 31+ FPS). The benchmark system was running 512MB of DDR400 RAM, I'll be running 1GB of DDR266 RAM, couple this with the faster CPU clockspeed and it'll probably run a smidge better, I'll most probably have a better GPU too, well the best AGP x4 GPU... which is?
Opinions? Thanks.
Well anyway, I went over to a mates house on the weekend and played some WarCraft III and C&C: Generals - Zero Hour and woah, I was really impressed. Now I dont want a fully blown beast that can play F.E.A.R, Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion etc, basically I'd like to be able to play said titles (WC3/C&C:ZH) at their peak along with some of the newer 3D-RTS titles (Maybe a littleRome: Total War) and some Counter Strike: Source. Anyway yeah, I've currently got a Mobo which only takes Socket-478 CPU's, so that kind of limits me to the newer Celeron D's. I figured that I'd go with a Celeron D as its cheaper and I'll most probably be purchasing a new "beast" for Vista etc early next year, so cheaper means I'll have more cash for when Vista arrives.
Im currently running a Pentium 4 (Northwood) 2.0Ghz (512k L2, 8k L1). So would the Celeron D (350, Prescott) 3.2Ghz (256k L2, 16k L1) perform better in a gaming sense? The benchmark seems to agree with me, just making sure, I've had a fiddle with one at general tasks (starting up applications, responsiveness) and they seem alot more stable and generally faster. Furthermore, does anyone know if the Celeron D's are compatible with the Intel 845G chipset?
I've read the Celeron D (335) 2.8Ghz review/benchmark (HERE) and it seems very capable of running the titles im interested in (WC3 - 43+ FPS, C&C:ZH - 31+ FPS). The benchmark system was running 512MB of DDR400 RAM, I'll be running 1GB of DDR266 RAM, couple this with the faster CPU clockspeed and it'll probably run a smidge better, I'll most probably have a better GPU too, well the best AGP x4 GPU... which is?
Opinions? Thanks.
Facebook
Twitter