celeron sucks??? or ??

Page 6 - Seeking answers? Join the Tom's Hardware community: where nearly two million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Kinda...

If you had a board that could support it you would probably be able to take lets say a 1.1ghz celeron just as far as a 1.13A tualatin pIII...however the good thing about the celerons is they always had a low bus speed...it is very hard to overclock a 133mhz bus cpu...but in perfect conditions they would probably max out at the same or at least very simular speeds...

If i put my k6 in a Ferrari it would be faster than your your pentium 4 or Athlon XP :tongue:
 
yeah its harder to overclock 133mhz cpus thats why i always had 100mhz pIII's ... and celeron is totally another story ... and btw .. i've once seen a celeron 550mhz runing at something around 1Ghz with those super coolers..
 
and btw .. there is no reason to be too fanatic about amd cpu's .. it was always same .. even in the days of 286's only AMD had the 20 mhz 286 CPU.. and fist AMD had the 40mhz 386 cpu .. and they first made the 100mhz 486 ... and cyrix was really a good competitor then .. but anyhow .. intel was always the smart one .. always the one to invent the new generation cpu's .. so there is no reason to get too excited about amd cpu's yeah they can always be faster .. but intel will always come up with the betters... and will keep shaping the future of the pc's .. :)
 
hmm i fail to understand amd making a 20mhz 286...

at the time of 286's amd was being contracted by intel...to the best of my knoledge all cpu's were sold under intel's name...

My father had a 286 that would overclock to 18mhz BTW...

the reason amd pushed the 386 soo hard was because they were lazy...it is much easier to bump up the clock speed than redisgn a new cpu archetecture...the first cpu that amd designed on their own was the k5...

Amd had intel beat with the first k7 based cpus, also with the k6-233 and cyrix had amd and intel beat with the 6x86 200...

Yes classically intel has had the fastest cpu out most of the time...but amd had intel beat for quite a while...

BTW your post seems pretty random to me...are you responding to something i said? Or just letting your opinion out?

If i put my k6 in a Ferrari it would be faster than your your pentium 4 or Athlon XP :tongue:
 
I dunno after reading this thread i get this feeling that you guys are just all gonna start barking at once but.....
I just bought a p4 celery 2.2ghz ...i am running it at 2992mhz with no problems and it kicks a$$ on my pIII 1000eb...... just my two bits worth
 
what fsb speed are u runing ur celeron at ??? and what voltage ??? i am not saying 2.2ghz at 3ghz will be slower than pIII 1000 but something like 1,7ghz celeron is not way faster than a 1000mhz PIII
 
ummm...can i say...DUH!...

I would hope so at least...

I mean...if you are on a budget the celeron is fine...but i think people should know that an equivilently clocked p4 will mutilate it...and an athlon xp will kill it for less cache...

Thats all i am saying...you can buy whatever you want...but i think that not enough gateway or dell buyers know this...


Proud owner of DOS 3.3 :smile:
 
fsb=136mhz
vcore=1.55v
ddr ref voltage=2.5v
mem spd=363mhz
ddr timings=2-2-2-5

Basically what i was trying to say there is that for the price....its really not that bad. And if thats what someone can afford and they already bought it.... instead of calling them an idiot, maybe try to help them with their setup. For me i am very happy with it.
Here is how i justify it to myself. Two years ago this is what i bought;
PIII 1000eb $385 cad
Cusl2-c $240 cad
256 meg pc133 $160 cad
so basically 800 dollars got me that

Last week bought;
2.2ghz celeron $110
p4pe-bp $150
256 meg pc2700 $65

$325 for a huge improvement. Encoded an asf movie to mpg1 using tmpgenc on the p3, took 20 min 33 sec. Did the same one on the new setup, took 8 min 55 sec. Made me happy.
 
yeah i know celerons are good for their price.. i mean at least in the hands of ppl who know what they are doing like u .. i am not saying celerons are very bad.. but obviously slow compared to same clock speeds of P4 or athlon processors.. but they can be really good processors when they are overclocked.. like u did .. i will do the same to my celeron too :) but my mobo is a terrible on (ESC P4vxblabla.. i dont even remember its model name).. and i have to set it up through the jumpers.. and i am sort of lazy to open the case, set it up and put it back where it was.. :) asus mobo i am using with my PIII is so easy about overclocking .. just go through the bios.. anyway .. yeah well as long as u overclock ur celerons they are great if you dont i believe they suck ..
 
installing doom III and playing it again after overclocking the celeron 1,7 and radeon 9100 i hate celerons less.. they are good as long as u overclock them .. and with good 512 ddr memory ..
 
The P4 Celeron exposes the P4's flawed design. Without large internal cache and high memory bandwidth chipsets to prop it up the P4 is nothing.

An AXP on the other hand will perform admirably even on a lowly SD-ram platform something that’s almost unthinkable for a P4 let alone a P4 Celeron.

The AXP in my mind is still the better designed CPU its just a shame AMD isn't putting resources into developing superior chipset technology like Intel has.
 
AMd's Athlon xp processors are all good but their PR rating is the problem.

<font color=blue>
My computer is <b>sooo fast</b>,
It finished <b>SETI</b> in <b>10 seconds.</b>
<font color=blue>
 
yeah i feel the same way about my pc too :)) anyhow i'll get my 9700 soon .. and hopefully most of the problems about games will be over.. anyhow .. i need to know one thing .. is there anyone around who can run his celeron 1,7 above 2.0+ Ghz ?? what did u make the voltage to make it run ??
 
Yes a R9700pro will help you out mate.
I got a R9800pro for my "lowly" 1750Mhz AMD system and all games FLY now.

Regarding your celleron, you are really out of luck sorry.

The P4 cellerons up to 2Ghz are based on the obselete 'Williamette' 0.18micron core.
And even with the best of cooling the 'Willy' ran out of steam around 2 to 2.2Ghz.
They also ran at up to 100W thermal output for the 2Ghz model. So were hot buggers. (despite people constantly slagging off at the AMD cpu's for running too hot) :smile:

The celleries above 2Ghz use the northwood core and can overclock up to 3Ghz or more.
(But still suffer greatly from the lack of cache and poor chipset/ram union)


<b>My Car comes with Hyper Threading enabled:
1970 General Motors Holden HT Kingswood Wagon :smile:
Regards,
Mr no integrity coward.</b>
 
yeah its weird but my celeron (1.7) refuses to run properly when it is overclocked... and actually i can say its the worst cpu i've ever seen about overclocking .. compared to old celerons and even coppermines.
 
not suprising.
the low end celleron was a great way to use up the old silicon (so to speak)
And as they say... you cant polish a turd :smile:

<b>My Car comes with Hyper Threading enabled:
1970 General Motors Holden HT Kingswood Wagon :smile:
Regards,
Mr no integrity coward.</b>
 
yeah i think ur right .. old celerons were so good about overclocking.. but the new ones .. hard to overclock .. ... well but i still feel like getting a really fast celeron like 2.6ghz is fine .. and especially after overclocking it a little .. it is still good for gaming ..
 
Well the Willy celleries suck at Overclocking yes... The ones based on the northwood core dont. They do quite well generally.

The issue is that even though you might be able to get 3Ghz out of say a 2.2 you dont get much extra performance.
In anything that matters its STILL a cache crippled P4. And they lag badly and scale poorly in bandwidth intensive applications. Especially games.

And most of the time they are mated to less than optimal chipsets which doesnt improve the situation. i.e. SDRAM or single channel lowspeed DDR.

<b>My Car comes with Hyper Threading enabled:
1970 General Motors Holden HT Kingswood Wagon :smile:
Regards,
Mr no integrity coward.</b>
 
yeah the fisrt p4 based celerons get extremely hot when u overclock it .. thats why u cant really overclock em to something thats really worth the try .
 
Yeah, considering that the AXP 2600+ can be had for a paltry $98 the 3200+ is a <b> terrible </b> value. When Athlon XP Palamino came up I had no problems with the PR system. But AMD did not increase the MHz for each extra 100+, only 66 MHz per each 100+ if I remember correctly. Its a shame that AMD has to charge so much for their flagship model that a P4 3200 probably has a better price/performance ratio which is also another <b> terrible </b> value at that.

My OS features preemptive multitasking, a fully interactive command line, & support for 640K of RAM!
 
its true in some ways ... everyone keeps comparing lower speed intel cpu's with the fastest amd cpu's so where is the price advantage of that ??? ... when u compare the fastest cpu of both produces intel really has an advantage.. its eventually faster... amd has a price adv. only if u are planing to get a slower P4 ... (and a slower amd ofcourse)..
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom