I've just run the Sandra cpu benchmarks on my new notebook pc which has a Celeron Tualatin 1.13GHz cpu. I found that on the arithmetic benchmark it is about 10% faster than a P4 1.6GHz and on the multimedia benchmark is on a par with it. I was initially a bit surprized at this. I also discovered that the Celery was faster than a (pre-Tualatin) P3 1.2GHz.
My take on this is that a P4 is known to be about 30% slower than P3 at any given frequency, so a P3 1.2Ghz is probably on a par with a P4 1.6Ghz. The new Tualatin Celerons have a 256kb cache, equivalent to the old P3's, and have a 133 FSB, so it's not unreasonable for them to be faster than a simlarly clocked P3 of old.
The interesting point here is that those people who are currently paying a premium for P4 notebooks are missing out on a better deal on Celeron machines. The one thing they would be missing tho is the memory bandwidth but most applications won't feel the difference.
My take on this is that a P4 is known to be about 30% slower than P3 at any given frequency, so a P3 1.2Ghz is probably on a par with a P4 1.6Ghz. The new Tualatin Celerons have a 256kb cache, equivalent to the old P3's, and have a 133 FSB, so it's not unreasonable for them to be faster than a simlarly clocked P3 of old.
The interesting point here is that those people who are currently paying a premium for P4 notebooks are missing out on a better deal on Celeron machines. The one thing they would be missing tho is the memory bandwidth but most applications won't feel the difference.
