• A Great friend to the HardForum with a great kid that he is trying to get a scholorship to continue his schooling. Please give hime a vote! Only 24 hours left! Thanks.
    If you have an VOTE FOR KEENAN!

Someone Explain This One To Me?

M

md262626

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jul 8, 2003
Messages
1,259
First off here's the system specs that matter:

My self built server:
1.4 Ghz Tualatin Celeron w/256 kb L2 cache @ 1.68 ghz in slotket

512 mb PC100 SDRAM CL3 @ 2-2-2-4T

Asus P3B-F m/b

GFTi4200 w/64 mb

7200 RPM HDD with 8 mb cache

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Her Gateway 500S system: (Purchased 11/01)

2.4 ghz P4 Celeron w/128 kb L2 cache (original CPU was a 1.5 ghz P4 that died)

512 mb PC133 SDRAM CL3 @ 3-3-3-8T (Originally had 256 mb added 256 mb of Corsair Value ram)

MSI 6534 m/b Bios set to optimized. If I o/c m/b even 1 mhz the onboard sound doesn't work(Original m/b was an Intel D845HV but died 2 weeks after warranty expired)

GF2 400MX w/64 mb

7200 RPM HDD with 8 mb cache (third HDD in this computer. other 2 Seagates died. this last one I bought was a Maxtor)

As you can see, buying a Gateway wasn't a good idea for her. Anyways, heres what I don't understand. Her system has always seemed slow. Recently I ran a whole bunch of benchmarks on my server to compare to her system. I thought running my 1.68 ghz system against her 2.4 ghz system would maybe change my mind on thinking her system was really that slow. Maybe I was just imagining things. Without going into all the benchmark scores, I wasn't wrong. Even with her 700mhz more clock speed, and faster RAM my rig beat hers in every benchmark, and and handily I might add. Now I realize that my server has more L2 cache than hers, but her's is 700 mhz faster! For those of you familiar with the benchmark SuperPi. I ran a 1M calc (19 iterations) and my 1.68 ran a 1m 32s. Her's ran a 2m 39s. By the way, none of the benchmarks were videocard related, strictly CPU intense. What gives? Are the new P4 Celerons really that crappy? Am I missing something in general? This is no shit, the performance of her rig reminds me of an old PII 350 I had in the late 90's. Please someone tell me I'm missing something obvious. If not, Intel should quit the business of making Celerons because they're screwing the public royally!
 
The Celerons are slower than Durons ;)

It is perfectly possible that your ~1.7GHz PIII could easily trounce her P4-based Celeron.
 
I'd just blame the low cache, 128 KB is crap...plus, she's on a gateway. They're not exactly the creme de la creme of OEMs.
 
Easy, a 1.4 Tualatin Celeron is a P3. Full cache etc. only reason it is called a Celeron is because of the 100MHZ FSB. (instead of 133)

A P4 Celeron with 128k cache is really crippled.

On a clock for clock basis at the same MHZ, a P3 is always faster than any P4. (higher IPC - Instructions Per Clock)

In addition the "Netburst" archetecture of the P4 is not only very cache dependant as it pays a much larger penalty to talk to RAM, but a P4 is also very bandwidth dependant, so single channel PC133 SDRAM is worse for a P4 than PC66 would be for a P3.

So the 700mhz difference is more than offset by the way the P4 has been crippled by the low bandwidth and cache.

That same CPU in a Dual Channel DDR motherboard would post much higher numbers, but it would still be a 128k Willy processor, and may not even then keep up with the Tualatin. And a new full P4 in that SDRAM mb would also still be slower than the Tualatin.

But pair a full P4 with some real bandwidth, then the P3's higher IPC stopps winning.


==>Lazn
 
A P4 Celeron with SDRAM and you are supprised? That 1.7Tulatin will kick its ass. Not to mention that you run at 2-2-2-4T and have a better video card. I am not supprised in the least.

Now, stick that 2.4 in an 865/875 with dual channel ddr, and it will probably perform on par with, even beat the Tulatin.

Tell me, what FPS do you get in a timedemo of quake3 demo, demo0001(select "Fastest" settings)? My celeron 2.4 got 130FPS on a single channel DDR i845. On a dual channel i865 it got 195FPS. Now, overclocked to 3.16 on the dual channel i865 it gets 265-270.
 
Originally posted by Josh_B
The Celerons are slower than Durons ;)

It is perfectly possible that your ~1.7GHz PIII could easily trounce her P4-based Celeron.
Click to expand...

My o/c'd 1.4 ghz is a Celeron too. Just that it's a Tualatin core and has the 256 KB L2 cache.
 
Originally posted by Dew
A P4 Celeron with SDRAM and you are supprised? That 1.7Tulatin will kick its ass. Not to mention that you run at 2-2-2-4T and have a better video card. I am not supprised in the least.

Now, stick that 2.4 in an 865/875 with dual channel ddr, and it will probably perform on par with, even beat the Tulatin.

Tell me, what FPS do you get in a timedemo of quake3 demo, demo0001(select "Fastest" settings)? My celeron 2.4 got 130FPS on a single channel DDR i845. On a dual channel i865 it got 195FPS. Now, overclocked to 3.16 on the dual channel i865 it gets 265-270.
Click to expand...

Thanks a lot guys for the info. Dew, where can I pick up the Quake3 demo and I'll run it for you. On 3dMark2001 SE on the lowest settings my 1.68 Celery runs a 10, 238. I can't belive what a pc of shit the current Celerons are. My first Intel Celeron Processor was this 1.4 Tualatin and I felt like the Celerons were ok. When it was my main rig, I was pretty happy with it's overall performance for gaming and apps. Turns out I guesss I just happened to buy one of the few Celerons that wasn't a total pc of shit. Intel should be ashamed of themselves for selling their current line of Celerons and even labeling them cpu's. I promise you that 2.4 ghz dog will be the last Celeron I ever buy!
 
your barton setup is compared to the celeron as equals lol so you might have to trash 2 systems
 
Originally posted by kennyc28
your barton setup is compared to the celeron as equals lol so you might have to trash 2 systems
Click to expand...

I don't know, I'm kinda fond of it;)
 
Just for giggles ran the demo 1
367 FPS on my system, i've not run that demo in a long time and was simply amazed by how fast it went, couldn't see the screen at all .. lol

Ran on Desktop 1 in sig
 
I shall try it on a 3.6ghz celeron here and a 9800 pro. I havnt used that benchie in 2 years.
 
I run fastest to completely eliminate the video card. If you want to make sure its not the video card, run it fastest, then change res to 320x240.

Also, my "Gamer" system gets 420fps at its current clock, 300FPS at default. I can do a few config tweaks that don't really lower video detail, but turns sound off and get over 730FPS.
 
Can somebody just make a sticky that says:

"If you buy a Celeron based PC don't come here crying about it's crappy performance "

I'm mean c'mon people, every other thread in this forum is someone wondering why his/hers P4 Celeron sucks... Sure, it may OC like a champ but that's about it.... Just stop it....:rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

Mike
 
Originally posted by mzs_biteme
Can somebody just make a sticky that says:

"If you buy a Celeron based PC don't come here crying about it's crappy performance "

I'm mean c'mon people, every other thread in this forum is someone wondering why his/hers P4 Celeron sucks... Sure, it may OC like a champ but that's about it.... Just stop it....:rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

Mike
Click to expand...

Hey Mike,

I don't know how you brouse forums, but I usually don't spend serious time searching thru archives to see if any1 has ever brought up a topic I'm contemplating Posting. I guess what I'm saying is take your comments and crappy attitude and go elsewhere:rolleyes:

Mike
 
And to be honest, the Celeron is not all that bad for its price.

I am more than happy with the gaming and encoding performance I get out of this little $70 cpu.

Sure I could have gotten an nForce2 mobo and a barton 2500+ and oc'ed that. But I really like the intel chipsets for the stability and compatability. (I made a complete switch from AMD to Intel a month ago.)
 
That's funny, I was running that 1.4 Tualatin Celeron as my main rig before I switched over to AMD 2 months ago................LOL
 
I bought a spare mobo for her right b4 Christmas It's an AsRock M266A and was on sale at NewEgg on the cheap. I've had to live with using microATX boards that use PC133 SDRAM if I want to utilize her basic Gateway set up. She basically plays 2D games and surfs the net, so I figured the 2.4 Celeron would be a wash for thr 1.5 P4 it replaced. Well my point for bringing this up is the spare mobo is the only one I've found that uses both PC133 and DDR on a microATX form factor. So you think it would be worth picking up a 512 mb stick of PC2100 DDR and swapping out mobos? Would there be a noticeable performance increase using PC2100 over the current PC133. The AsRock m/b has 4 DIMM slots. 2 for SDRAM and 2 for DDR. Let me know what you think.
 
In a word, yes.

I went from SDRAM on a P4 to DDR on a P4 to Dual Channel DDR on that same P4, every step of the way was noticable.

==>Lazn
 
Not sure, mine is a 2.4B Northwood. (non HT, but full cache)

==>Lazn
 
Generally, all P4 Celerons are rather terrible. The Prescott Celerons might be better though.
 
Originally posted by md262626
Would it work for a Northwood cored Celeron the same way?
Click to expand...

Originally posted by Dew
...My celeron 2.4 got 130FPS on a single channel DDR i845. On a dual channel i865 it got 195FPS. Now, overclocked to 3.16 on the dual channel i865 it gets 265-270.
Click to expand...
 
Dew,

I see what you are saying but in your example you went from single channel DDR to dual channel DDR. I'm going from PC133 to I'm guessing PC2100. Am I missing your point? I don' really feel like spending anymore money on her Gateway dinasour unless theres some value in it. Like I said earlier the only Celeron I've ever owned was the Tualatin cored 1.4 ghz w/256 L2 which is doing server duties as we speak. When it was my regular desktop it would play all games at respectable frame rates including BF 1942 which you know is cpu intense. So when I bought this 2.4 ghz Northwood cored Celeron I was thinking it's performance would at least be on par with the one I owned. I can't believe the 128 kb difference of L2 could make that much of a difference but what the hell do I know? Would there be justifiable value switching m/b's and picking up a 512 stick of PC2100?
 
I see where you are coming from.

But that I am saying is this: when running SDR on that 2.4 celeron you have, if you run the timedemo you should get somewhere around 80-85FPS(assuming the doubling of bandwidth over fps holds contant)

What I'm saying is that you should run the timedemo and see where you are, you can then see where you would go.

I can also disable dual channel on my 865 and run benchmarks if ya like. This would let you know almost exactly where your processor would go.
 
Thanks! I think I'm gonna buy that stick of PC2100. That's the fasted the m/b will handle. The cheapo m/b is an AsRock M266A
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top