performance between celly and p4 chips??

[ctcsoft]

Is there a major notcieable difference??

Say if I got a p4 1.6-1.8 socket 478 cpu. What Celeron chip would give me comparable performance?

This recently acquired Chyang Fun SFF pc I got calls for a p4 478 cpu, but I would be Celerons would work too and cost me less $$.

 

[jagec]

there is a HUGE difference. Celerons work OK until you try to do anything besides desktop+web browsing, once you try and fire up a game or anything they CHOKE.

Never buy a Celeron unless you're being held at gunpoint (Or you're JUST going to use the machine for internet+office)

 

[Regs]

Anything Is better than a celery. An AMD Duron would be better for instance.

 

[dennisjai215]

a 2.8celeron would compare to a p4 1.8 =D

 

[ctcsoft]

Originally posted by: dennisjai215
a 2.8celeron would compare to a p4 1.8 =D

Whoa okay. I think I will got with a p4 then.

I've just been away from Intel chips for a LONG time. Last Pentium chip I had was a 733 PIII.

 

[modedepe]

Celerons are horrible, but then again a 1.8 or 1.6 p4 willamette isn't that hot either.

 

[Regs]

Originally posted by: jmoe782

Originally posted by: dennisjai215
a 2.8celeron would compare to a p4 1.8 =D

Whoa okay. I think I will got with a p4 then.

I've just been away from Intel chips for a LONG time. Last Pentium chip I had was a 733 PIII.

Celery's are crippled P4's. Since they have a long pipe line (stages), all those stages need to be filled with data to work effectively. With added cache, the pipeline can quickly be feed by data. Without the extra cache, the CPU would have to constantly keep asking for data from the memory which is much slower than the CPU's local cache.

 

[ctcsoft]

Originally posted by: modedepe
Celerons are horrible, but then again a 1.8 or 1.6 p4 willamette isn't that hot either.

Well, The manual here says it supports 800mhz-2.4ghz p4 chips socket 478. The manual is obviously wrong big time since no 800mhz p4 chips exist.

I'm looking to use this box as internet/office/dvd ripping/emailing tasks. Nothing much more then that. No games.

 

[mechBgon]

Originally posted by: jagecNever buy a Celeron unless you're being held at gunpoint (Or you're JUST going to use the machine for internet+office)

Actually, I'd even rule out the Scumarons for serious office usage, based on what I've seen McAfee VirusScan Enterprise do to the performance of AthlonXP's or even my Athlon64. AthlonXP, Duron, Athlon64 or a Northwood P4, but not Celeron.

Anyone out there think an A64 is overkill for office usage? :evil: Load up VirusScan Enterprise 7.0, arm all its detection options, start Microsoft Access2000 and attempt to open the Help file... and go get some coffee from the break room while VS Enterprise gives the ACMAIN9.CHM file a thorough examination. It takes my fairly-nice A64 system about 55 seconds to fight its way clear. I don't even want to THINK about trying this on a Celeron. :|

 

[Regs]

Originally posted by: mechBgon

Originally posted by: jagecNever buy a Celeron unless you're being held at gunpoint (Or you're JUST going to use the machine for internet+office)

Actually, I'd even rule out the Scumarons for serious office usage, based on what I've seen McAfee VirusScan Enterprise do to the performance of AthlonXP's or even my Athlon64. AthlonXP, Duron, Athlon64 or a Northwood P4, but not Celeron.

Anyone out there think an A64 is overkill for office usage? :evil: Load up VirusScan Enterprise 7.0, arm all its detection options, start Microsoft Access2000 and attempt to open the Help file... and go get some coffee from the break room while VS Enterprise gives the ACMAIN9.CHM file a thorough examination. It takes my fairly-nice A64 system about 55 seconds to fight its way clear. I don't even want to THINK about trying this on a Celeron. :|

Security is a little redundant in many areas at work I see.

 

[mechBgon]

Originally posted by: Regs

Originally posted by: mechBgon

Originally posted by: jagecNever buy a Celeron unless you're being held at gunpoint (Or you're JUST going to use the machine for internet+office)

Actually, I'd even rule out the Scumarons for serious office usage, based on what I've seen McAfee VirusScan Enterprise do to the performance of AthlonXP's or even my Athlon64. AthlonXP, Duron, Athlon64 or a Northwood P4, but not Celeron.

Anyone out there think an A64 is overkill for office usage? :evil: Load up VirusScan Enterprise 7.0, arm all its detection options, start Microsoft Access2000 and attempt to open the Help file... and go get some coffee from the break room while VS Enterprise gives the ACMAIN9.CHM file a thorough examination. It takes my fairly-nice A64 system about 55 seconds to fight its way clear. I don't even want to THINK about trying this on a Celeron. :|

Security is a little redundant in many areas at work I see.

Yeah, the guy responsible for the antivirus configuration ought to be fired! :|

 

[Cerb]

Celeron 2.6 = P4 1.6 or XP 1500+.
Basically, if you have the slightest doubt in your mind, get the real P4.

Originally posted by: jmoe782

Originally posted by: modedepe
Celerons are horrible, but then again a 1.8 or 1.6 p4 willamette isn't that hot either.

Well, The manual here says it supports 800mhz-2.4ghz p4 chips socket 478. The manual is obviously wrong big time since no 800mhz p4 chips exist.

/me whacks you with a mallet.
They are called P4C and P4E (the C being better at the moment). If you have the $ to get one, do so. HT will help a fair bit in DVD ripping, and brings the P4s up to the level of Athlons in light multitasking, and beating them handily in heavy multitasking...like say, browsing the web while ripping a DVD .

I'm looking to use this box as internet/office/dvd ripping/emailing tasks. Nothing much more then that. No games.

You don't technically *need* a P4C w/ HT for desktop work, but as long as you have a fair HD (7200 RPM 80GB+), you will be able to appreciate the difference.

 

[JustAnAverageGuy]

for your conveinence

 

[mobobuff]

Originally posted by: jmoe782

Originally posted by: modedepe

Well, The manual here says it supports 800mhz-2.4ghz p4 chips socket 478. The manual is obviously wrong big time since no 800mhz p4 chips exist.

Uh, that's FSB speeds. P4 processors with Front-Side-Bus support of 800mhz.

 

[MichaelZ]

that's intel's quad pumped system bus. 200 is the real front side bus.

 

[ctcsoft]

Originally posted by: mobobuff

Originally posted by: jmoe782

Originally posted by: modedepe

Well, The manual here says it supports 800mhz-2.4ghz p4 chips socket 478. The manual is obviously wrong big time since no 800mhz p4 chips exist.

Uh, that's FSB speeds. P4 processors with Front-Side-Bus support of 800mhz.

Uh... NO ITS NOT. Need me to scan the manual????

It supports 400FSB and 533 FSB according to the manual. And 800mhz-2.4ghz p4 cpus. Even though p4s start at 1.3

 

[randumb]

Long Pipeline + Miniscule Cache + Slow Front Side Bus = Bad Performance.

 

[StrangerGuy]

Originally posted by: randumb
Long Pipeline + Miniscule Cache + Slow Front Side Bus = Bad Performance.

Bad Performance + Worse Pricing = Horrible Value.

 

[Slacker]

Hehehe, interesting thread and nice timing, I bought one of those Toshiba laptops at BestBuys Memorial day sale that had a desktop celeron 2.8, I like to take things apart so I was messing around and found the heat pipe cooler and processor socket and decided to try swapping the 2.8ghz celeron out for a 2.2ghz P4 (512k L2) I am using it right now

So is it safe to assume that trading 600 celeron mhz for an additional 384k L2 is a smart move? what other benefits will the P4 have over the higher clocked celeron?

 

[StrangerGuy]

Originally posted by: Slacker
Hehehe, interesting thread and nice timing, I bought one of those Toshiba laptops at BestBuys Memorial day sale that had a desktop celeron 2.8, I like to take things apart so I was messing around and found the heat pipe cooler and processor socket and decided to try swapping the 2.8ghz celeron out for a 2.2ghz P4 (512k L2) I am using it right now

So is it safe to assume that trading 600 celeron mhz for an additional 384k L2 is a smart move? what other benefits will the P4 have over the higher clocked celeron?

No. 2.8GHz Celeron Review

 

[Slacker]

I think you misread my post, I removed a celeron 2.8ghz and replaced it with a P4 2.2ghz, those benches show that a 2.4 P4 beat a celeron 2.8 with enough headroom to lead me to believe that the 2.2 would also beat it.

I got 1700 in 3dmark2001se with the celeron, let me try it now with the 2.2 P4, also got 77fps in Q3 with the celeron so I am going to check that with the P4 now also.

BRB


Old 3dmark2001se score with the 2.8ghz celeron 1700

New 3dmark2001se score with the 2.2ghz P4 2100

Q3 benches coming up

Old Q3 fps with 2.8ghz celeron 77 at 800x600

New Q3 fps with 2.2ghz P4 110 at 800x600

 

[StrangerGuy]

Originally posted by: Slacker
I think you misread my post, I removed a celeron 2.8ghz and replaced it with a P4 2.2ghz, those benches show that a 2.4 P4 beat a celeron 2.8 with enough headroom to lead me to believe that the 2.2 would also beat it.

I got 1700 in 3dmark2001se with the celeron, let me try it now with the 2.2 P4, also got 77fps in Q3 with the celeron so I am going to check that with the P4 now also.

BRB


Old 3dmark2001se score with the 2.8ghz celeron 1700

New 3dmark2001se score with the 2.2ghz P4 2100

Q3 benches coming up

Old Q3 fps with 2.8ghz celeron 77 at 800x600

New Q3 fps with 2.2ghz P4 110 at 800x600

OOPS! Sorry! Hope you don't mind...I thought you swapped a 2.2 P4 for a 2.8 Celery.