Celeron Question

[Rude]

Just wondering who of you use the Celeron 500mzh and how it might compare to the PIII 500?

If you could post some fps examples I would be grateful

Rude

[Regular]

Hmm...did not want this post to get lost. BTW  What vid card would you experts put into this type of CPU with 128  RAM???

[MrSiD]

Celeron500 is quite a bit slower than a PIII of similar clock speed.

Reasons for that are its lower bus speed (66mhz) and smaller L2 cache. Both of those hurt performance a lot, making a celeron 700Mhz as fast or slower than a PIII 500.

Good news is, most of celerons overclock nicely.. So you can pump the FSB up to 90-120Mhz. In that case, a celeron can give you some value for your money. You'd be better off buying a Duron 600 for example anyway.

Any graphics card is ok for a celeron system, cost wise probably a geforce2 MX sdr would suite it best. With any faster graphics card the CPU performance will limit getting any speed gain..

OTOH, if you got the celeron for free and plan to upgrade it later, a Geforce2 might be a good buy. However, the development in graphics card is so fast, that you should buy high-end graphics cards only to high-end systems. Otherwise youre just wasting your money.

Geforce3 and Geforce2 ultra require a good 1.3Ghz (AMD ;-)) CPU speed untill their performance limits are filled. With a CPU any slower, you're basically wasting your money with those two.

[Fishu]

Well, I've had Celeron 500, although currently using 566@850.
Celeron 500 is quite slow when comparing to PIII and this version of celeron also overclocks badly.
266 through 433 might overclock nicely in comparison to original frequency, but 466 and 500 celerons overclocks at most ~80mhz.
celerons up from 533 overclocks way better (like my 566 to 850mhz, even 952mhz could be used)

Though, 533 and above uses FCPGA slot while 500 and below uses PPGA.
If theres Slot-1 motherboard, then both can be used with an adapter that will be inserted in the slot-1 socket and the PPGA/FCPGA CPU on the adapter (depending whether it is for FCPGA or PPGA).

[Fishu]

 

Originally posted by MrSiD:
Geforce3 and Geforce2 ultra require a good 1.3Ghz (AMD ;-)) CPU speed untill their performance limits are filled. With a CPU any slower, you're basically wasting your money with those two.

I'd like to differ here.
GF2's are like made for computers like P700 and above, not just for some high end systems.
Actually at 1.3ghz, GF2 will be giving out its best and necessarily can't achieve much more beyond that.
GF3 is overly priced card that will give a kick for even P700, while it can give out alot more with better CPU than GF2 can. (neither would be maxed out as soon)

[bloom25]

Hmm, a lot of confused people here.  

First, a celeron 500 vs a p3 500 is not actually that much slower.  Yes, it does *only* have 128kb of L2 cache ram, but that ram runs at full processor speed.  The original P3s cache only ran at half speed.  Also, the bus being limited to 66 Mhz does hamper performance, but at only 500 Mhz the difference is not huge.

The real fun comes when you overclock the celeron, if you get a good one to run at 100 Mhz FSB you will find that it's performance is identical (or even better) than the p3.

The situation is different for the faster celerons.  Once they got to 700 Mhz + that 66 mhz bus was really holding their performance down.  It would be a safe bet that a 566 Celeron would perform (and often outperform) the early Katimi core P3s.

As for video cards, current CPUs are WAY WAY WAY WAY WAY (add 5 more ways) overpowered for the current generation of cards.  All of today's video cards are limited by their RAM.  Ram speed, unlike processor speed, has not advanced as rapidly.  Any CPU above about 750 Mhz or so can easily fill rate limit even a GF 2 Ultra at high resolutions.  (I'm not talking about the amount of ram, I'm talking about the speed of the ram.)  I believe the GF 2 is advertised to have a peak fill rate of something like 1 Gigatexels, however current ram limitations limit it to about 300 - 500 Megatexels.

This is pretty easy to spot in game benchmarks for new CPUs.  Often times the tests will be within 1 fps of each other, this is because the video card just won't allow any higher framerates.

 

------------------
bloom25
-MAW-
(Formerly of the)
THUNDERBIRDS

[Fishu]

Bloom,

Actually 500mhz is worst celeron to overclock.
533 and above gets already overclocked far better (but with FCPGA socket while 500 and below are PPGA)

You can't arque with someone whos owned cel500 and read about CPU's  

[MrSiD]

I was referring to GF2 Ultra which is quite a bit different from the GT..

At low resolutions an ultra or GF3 will need a lot of cpu speed in order to get the maximum performance. Most players play at 1024x768 if they have screens smaller than 19".

I was comparing the celeron speed to the coppermine core, which beats it here and back. I don't even consider anyone would use the Katmai anymore in a newly built system.

I've had both Celeron466 and 667 (overclocked to 550Mhz and 950Mhz respectively.) and I regret not investing to a PIII or even better, an AMD based system.

[SKurj]

Until recently I relied on Celeries for bang for buck.  I went from a 266 which I ran at 450, and just upgraded from a 366@550
I purchased a celery 800 quite ignorantly, I thought it would fit my board... nope... then i discover it is likely quite poor for overclocking.  Well, seeing as I needed a new board anyways, I traded the celery for a Duron 800, wow am I glad I did.  The AMD is cheaper than the celery and it outperforms it in every way.
I run the 800 at 1ghz at the moment.

I'd recommend a GF2 MX on a 500mhz class machine, they are cheap, and work great, I saw a big improvement when I swapped my V3 3000 for a GF2 MX on my 550

AMD is the clocker's cpu of today, celery's are a thing of the past.

Salvo

[This message has been edited by SKurj (edited 05-29-2001).]

[Sparks]

I run a Celeron 500 and have tried to overclock it to only 75mhz FSB but failed miserably. It booted once at that FSB but never again any ideas anyone may have to tickle it into submission would be gratefully recieved.

In terms of fps I run a 32mb Rage Fury card (not a Pro - just plain vanilla) but I use the Rage tweaking tool from Rage Underground and have upped the memory speed and cpu speed of the card from 90 to 120 and that has helped ENORMOUSLY - I now can run at 1024 X 768 at 32 bit and get 30 - 45 fps. Drop colour to 16 bit and it is solid 35-50fps).

For ref I am using DirectX8.1 and lastest Beta drivers from ATI (15 may release)

[SKurj]

Visit some overclocking websites Sparks, there are lots of things you can try.


Salvo

[bloom25]

Fishu, I never said anything about overclocking the 500 specifically.  They did not overclock as well as the 300as or any of the others.

(BTW:  You shouldn't argue with someone who DESIGNS CPU components for a living.   )



------------------
bloom25
-MAW-
(Formerly of the)
THUNDERBIRDS