| Forum Home | ||||
| Press F1 | ||||
| Thread ID: 49888 | 2004-10-04 03:39:00 | Celeron:P4 Ratio? | george12 (7) | Press F1 |
| Post ID | Timestamp | Content | User | ||
| 278048 | 2004-10-04 03:39:00 | Hi, I was wondering if there was a basic ratio to use in general in the form: xGhz of P4 = xGhz of Celeron Or, just answer these questions: Which is faster? 1.5Ghz P4 (FSB 533, 512KB L2) or 2.0Ghz Celeron D (FSB 533, 256KB L2) Which is faster? 1.7Ghz P4 (FSB 533, 512KB L2) or 2.0Ghz Celeron D (FSB 533, 256KB L2) Which is faster? 1.5Ghz P4 (FSB 533, 512KB L2) or 2.4Ghz Celeron D (FSB 533, 256KB L2) Pretend AMD doesn't exist. Consider also that the 1.5Ghz P4 is secondhand and the celeron is new. See 'Buying half a new PC' if you want to know the background to this question. |
george12 (7) | ||
| 278049 | 2004-10-04 03:48:00 | there is no easy answer sorry..... the speed can be 1 to 1 or it can be 3 to 1 depending on what you are using the CPU for. a P4 will kick a cellron in a task that access RAM a lot due to the bigger cache but in a raw number crunching job they will be much the same because the speed of the job is limited by the core clock speed and not data to/from the RAM. |
robsonde (120) | ||
| 278050 | 2004-10-04 03:52:00 | Thats not the easist question to answer as the new Celeron D's preform alot better than the older northwood based celerons. There currently arent alot of benchmarks out there for the new celeron D's. The 1.5Ghz would probably preform very close to the 2.0Ghz Celeron and possibly out preform it. The 1.7Ghz should kick its ass good, and I'd expect the 2.4Ghz Celeron to out perform the 1.5Ghz P4. If you could hunt down an older 1.6A or 1.8A P4 they overclock like crazy and easily reached 2.4Ghz+. |
Pete O'Neil (250) | ||
| 278051 | 2004-10-04 04:03:00 | I would take a p4 over a Celery any day of the week, Owning a comp with a celeron inside would feel like finding a cockroach in your breadroll...... | metla (154) | ||
| 278052 | 2004-10-04 04:27:00 | Or half a cockroach | Shaun Minfie (2961) | ||
| 278053 | 2004-10-04 04:42:00 | I have a Celeron in right now, 1.2Ghz (running at 1.34). There is some good about them. They can overclock heaps and run really cool (like 31 degrees right now). But I have noticed sort of bottlenecks when loading programs etc, where it will drasticly slow for a few secs and run like a Cel400. They are OK at encoding video and stuff, but not at programs etc. In the real world of Macromedia Dreamweaver and Office etc, it runs as slow as my old PIII 500. However my friend has a Celeron 2.4, and it runs beatifully. A celeron D will run even better I'm guessing. I do quite a bit of work on video where it seems to be Mhz that matters and not a lot else (although it is very RAM intensive). So I think I might try to ignore that half-cache cockroach and go for the Celeron D 2.4Ghz. Thanks for the help. |
george12 (7) | ||
| 278054 | 2004-10-04 04:45:00 | Those Celeron D's 2 2.4Ghz overclock like crazy, at the moment ive got one humming away nicely at 3.4GHz trying for 4GHz+ but with a limited selection of motherboards its proving difficult. | Pete O'Neil (250) | ||
| 278055 | 2004-10-04 04:45:00 | And if it's anything like my current CPU I'll be able to overclock it up to 2.7 at least without extra cooling. I will also go for some DDR ram I think, 512 DDR400 sounds good. And a new motherboard. I'm :) now - just have to strech my money out to get it all though. |
george12 (7) | ||
| 278056 | 2004-10-04 11:01:00 | I would take a p4 over a Celery any day of the week For all intents and purposes celeron d's are williamete p4s on a smaller die and they certainly are a hell of lot better performers than the willamete and northwood celerons. Benchmarks I've seen puts a celeron d 2600 competing on reasonably equal terms with a 2500 xp. Still better bang for your buck with amd though :-) |
the highlander (245) | ||
| 1 | |||||