which is faster: Pentium 3 866mhz vs Celeron 1.1 ghz?

[PremiumG]

Which of these chips would u put in?
P3 866 which has 256kb cache and runs 133mhz bus
or
1.1 ghz Celeron which has 128kb cache and runs 100mhz bus?

also, there is no room to OC at all cause its a Dell mobo

 

[2kfire]

I'd say P3. I had a 800 MHz w/ 100 FSB that 'felt' faster than a friend's 1.4 celeron even when just opening word and such

 

[coomar]

the p3

 

[bjc112]

866 Hands down..

the 256 cache and 133 FSB was a huge benefit back then!

 

[Regalk]

I thought the Celeron 1G and higher had 256K cache (i.e. replacing the tulatins or something). But then that was so lnog ago I may be wrong. I set up a 1G celery a few years ago and have run it at 1.333 from day 1 (3-4 years now)

 

[daclayman]

I actually know this answer. I have a Celly 1.1 (not Tualatin) and have played with many a P3. A non-Tualatin Celeron is, clock for clock, about 15 - 20% slower than an equally clocked P3.

So....

1100 x .85 = 935
1100 x .80 = 880

Should be a toss-up but a slight advantage to the Celly on some benches. I used to have 3Dmark2000 benchies to compare, but those are long gone. I'd sell the one the gets you the most money and keep the other.

 

[sundev]

As others have said, depends if it's a Tualatin. I recently upgraded from a P3 800 to a Cel-T 1200, and the Cel-T beat it in almost all respects. And it beats it in all respects now that it's overclocked to 1440 (120 MHz FSB).

 

[dexvx]

Originally posted by: 2kfire
I'd say P3. I had a 800 MHz w/ 100 FSB that 'felt' faster than a friend's 1.4 celeron even when just opening word and such

Then your friend must have spyware. No way a Tualatin Celeron will lose to a Coppermine P3 in any benchmark.

The highest Coppermine Celerons were 1.1Ghz, and you can tell because they had 128KB L2 cache.

 

[phaxmohdem]

Yep I own a coppermine Cel 1.1, and honestly its prety damn close in performance to a PIII 866 (Also own one). I'd personally just use the PIII though as it seems overall smoother in operating. Make SURE when you are using either chip though to give it 512MB or more of RAM. This will keep whatever chip you choose running smoothly through most tasks under WinXP/2000

 

[2kfire]

Originally posted by: dexvx

Originally posted by: 2kfire
I'd say P3. I had a 800 MHz w/ 100 FSB that 'felt' faster than a friend's 1.4 celeron even when just opening word and such

Then your friend must have spyware. No way a Tualatin Celeron will lose to a Coppermine P3 in any benchmark.

The highest Coppermine Celerons were 1.1Ghz, and you can tell because they had 128KB L2 cache.

True, not in any benchmark. Of course, I had 512 MB RAM on mine to 128 MB on his w/ WinXP on both systems, and I had a 7200 RPM HDD compared to a 5400 on his. So yeah, all that would help with the clock/core differences.

However, the OP wants to know about a P3 EB (coppermine/133 FSB) compared to a Coppermine Celeron, not a Tualatin Celeron. If I could keep up with a Tualatin with only an 800 MHz P3 E(Coppermine/100FSB), the 866 MHz P3 EB should wipe the floor with the coppermine Celeron

 

[Leper Messiah]

Cel-T would rape it I think, but Cel-B wouldn't.