Nov 19, 2004
What makes these so bad? From what I've read, I think its something like they have an absurdly high multiplier and low FSB? I don't know, that's just a guess.


Thier crippled P4's with some with no or half cache

<pre><font color=red>°¤o,¸¸¸,o¤°`°¤o \\// o¤°`°¤o,¸¸¸,o¤°
And the sign says "You got to have a membership card to get inside" Huh
So I got me a pen and paper And I made up my own little sign</pre><p></font color=red>


Former Staff
There were lots of Celerons. The first dogs had no cache. The second ones were OK, but with a pathetic multiplier you had to get a slow one and overclock the hell out of it to get the bus speed needed for performance. They've pretty much stayed with that method, eventually adding latency to the cache while cutting it to half that of the Pentium version.

<font color=blue>Only a place as big as the internet could be home to a hero as big as Crashman!</font color=blue>
<font color=red>Only a place as big as the internet could be home to an ego as large as Crashman's!</font color=red>
Intel-based Celerons? You mean there are other companies out there making Celerons?


<font color=red> If you design software that is fool-proof, only a fool will want to use it. </font color=red>