Author Topic: what is the difference between celeron ando ther Pentium pcu's? (Read 897 times)

B17Skull12 · « **on:** August 25, 2004, 07:11:20 PM »

ok i need to get educated. Whats the difference?

Thorns · « **Reply #1 on:** August 25, 2004, 08:15:05 PM »

http://www.tomshardware.com

http://www.anandtech.com

Start here to answer your question;

http://www6.tomshardware.com/cpu/20020903/

Hope this helps...

Thorns

GunnerCAF · « **Reply #2 on:** August 25, 2004, 08:17:45 PM »

jetb123 · « **Reply #3 on:** August 25, 2004, 08:51:39 PM »

Celerons suck! Take it from a guy who has a celeron. Dont buy one ever. You will regreat it for the rest of your life. Pentiums are way faster then crappy celerons.

Overlag · « **Reply #4 on:** August 25, 2004, 09:06:13 PM »

P4 Prescot is
16k L1 cache
1024k L2 cache

P4 Northwood is
8k L1 cache
512kb L2 cache

Celeron Prescott
16k L1 cache
256k L2 cache

Celeron Northwood
8k L1 cache
128k L2 cache

Basicaly its the cache that KILLS celerons speed. Celerons also dont have HT (2 logical cpus) and i think most use 533fsb instead of 800 for the P4.

AMD Athlon 64 will beat them all though......

FBScud · « **Reply #5 on:** August 26, 2004, 04:45:14 PM »

I have owned a PC since the early 90's. They have all been Intel chips. After reading this board and reviewing other sources, I believe my next PC will be AMD based. A lot of what I've read indicates that AMD has truly leaped ahead of Intel, particularly for gaming applications. Read up on it and I'm sure you'll find the same thing.

LOL...I'm listening Skuzzy! After asking about different component upgrades, I've resigned myself to a new system just for this *&^%()_{() game. Not that its a bad thing...

This board is a great start to learn about components that will make AHII sing. Its a whole new language since my last PC purchase in 2001.

OIO · « **Reply #6 on:** August 26, 2004, 04:46:33 PM »

think of it this way:

Celeron= V4 engine 2L

Pentiums= V8 engines 4L

Both will reach 100mph but only one of them will get there faster and have more power.

And power is what you really want for games

humble · « **Reply #7 on:** August 26, 2004, 06:40:01 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by OIO
think of it this way:

Celeron= V4 engine 2L

Pentiums= V8 engines 4L

Both will reach 100mph but only one of them will get there faster and have more power.

And power is what you really want for games

And the AMD socket 939 64 is the ferrari V-12:aok

Overlag · « **Reply #8 on:** August 26, 2004, 07:15:01 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by humble
And the AMD socket 939 64 is the ferrari V-12:aok

nooooooo!

the v12 is the P4 prescott, sucks in the fuel as a massive rate, creates alot of heat, and high rpm, but not worth it for the power

the AMD 939 64 is a ferrari V10 type 53

lol

bloom25 · « **Reply #9 on:** August 26, 2004, 10:29:05 PM »

Prescott core derived Celerons are often noted as Celeron Ds. Overlag is correct in cache sizes and lack of Hyperthreading in the Celeron line. Celeron Ds use a 533 MHz FSB and the older Northwood derived Celerons are 400 MHz FSB parts. All of these cuts result in a severely crippled product.

I cannot recommend buying any Celeron based system. They perform poorly and are not priced well considering their performance versus their AMD counterparts or even compared with their Pentium 4 relatives after Intel's recent price cuts.

MOSQ · « **Reply #10 on:** August 27, 2004, 11:27:25 AM »

I'm too old I guess. I remember the days when Celereys were considered the hot gaming choice. You could overclock the heck out of them and smoke a PII or PIII. Celerons offered tremendous price value + performance. And the AMD K-6-2 was such a poor performer because of it's lack of floating point ability, it wasn't even mentioned. I did use the k-6-2- 400 in my business machine , where it still sits today running SUSE Linux just fine.

Overlag · « **Reply #11 on:** August 27, 2004, 11:34:03 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by MOSQ
I'm too old I guess. I remember the days when Celereys were considered the hot gaming choice. You could overclock the heck out of them and smoke a PII or PIII. Celerons offered tremendous price value + performance. And the AMD K-6-2 was such a poor performer because of it's lack of floating point ability, it wasn't even mentioned. I did use the k-6-2- 400 in my business machine , where it still sits today running SUSE Linux just fine.

yes but that was 6 years ago...things have changed

Thorns · « **Reply #12 on:** August 27, 2004, 11:37:05 AM »

Wait till you see what happens in the next six years!

Thorns

Overlag · « **Reply #13 on:** August 27, 2004, 11:38:09 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Thorns
Wait till you see what happens in the next six years!

Thorns

i dont think much is going to happen

i mean the last 2 years have been rubbish in the cpu world.....

MOSQ · « **Reply #14 on:** August 27, 2004, 12:05:02 PM »

I need a new gaming system, (especially for OzKansas!!!!) but am waiting till January when we should see a decent selection of PCI Express mobos, PCI Express Vid cards, SATA HDs, DDR2 memory, and the new Intel Chipsets out. That will force AMD to have further price cuts on Athlon 64s, and should create some very good price/performance systems.

I never buy cutting edge stuff, and this is a good time to wait for the inevitable price reductions on all these new standards.