A computer components & hardware forum. HardwareBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » HardwareBanter forum » General Hardware & Peripherals » General
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

CPU info.- Celeron 2.4 vs Intel P4



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old November 14th 03, 08:18 AM
Taishi
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default CPU info.- Celeron 2.4 vs Intel P4

I did some research on the internet about the CPU's in question. I see that
the Celeron is a cheaper CPU than the P4.

Do anyone know the story behind the Celeron?

Has anyone seen a big difference between a Celeron 2.4 vs a Intel P4 PC?

Are there any Con's to having a Celeron over a P4?

Is there a big difference between a Celeron 2.4 vs 2.5?


  #2  
Old November 14th 03, 01:47 PM
philo
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Taishi" wrote in message
.. .
I did some research on the internet about the CPU's in question. I see

that
the Celeron is a cheaper CPU than the P4.

Do anyone know the story behind the Celeron?

Has anyone seen a big difference between a Celeron 2.4 vs a Intel P4 PC?

Are there any Con's to having a Celeron over a P4?

Is there a big difference between a Celeron 2.4 vs 2.5?



the celeron has a smaller internal cache

so it depends on what you will be using it for


if you are going to be playing solotaire and checking you email
get the celeron

running photoshop? i;d go for the P-IV


as far as the difference between a 2.4 and a 2.5ghz

the only noticable difference would be in the wallet


  #3  
Old November 14th 03, 11:41 PM
DaveW
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

The Celeron 2.4 GHz is less efficient and has one quarter of the on board
cache memory of the P4 2.5 GHz. In other words, the Celeron is slower, as
you can guess by just looking at the difference in prices...

--
DaveW



"Taishi" wrote in message
.. .
I did some research on the internet about the CPU's in question. I see

that
the Celeron is a cheaper CPU than the P4.

Do anyone know the story behind the Celeron?

Has anyone seen a big difference between a Celeron 2.4 vs a Intel P4 PC?

Are there any Con's to having a Celeron over a P4?

Is there a big difference between a Celeron 2.4 vs 2.5?




  #4  
Old December 9th 03, 02:01 AM
Ancra
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Fri, 14 Nov 2003 08:18:01 GMT, "Taishi"
wrote:

I did some research on the internet about the CPU's in question. I see that
the Celeron is a cheaper CPU than the P4.


Well, why anyone at all, for any purpose at all, buys
(P4-core)Celerons is only due to ignorance, and the _VERY_ false
assumption that GHz is speed.

Do anyone know the story behind the Celeron?


Celeron is the trademark for Intels cheaper cpus. The old
(PII-PIII-core) Celeron was nice enough, but the P4 architecture is so
abyssmally inefficient that newer Celerons are disasters.

Has anyone seen a big difference between a Celeron 2.4 vs a Intel P4 PC?


Yes. Though all older P4s are slower than 'P4Cs' and AthlonXPs, in
particular P4A and Celerons are very slow indeed. I would say the
difference is gruesome. Have a look at these pages, to see much
cheaper Duron and AthlonXPs outclass Celerons and P4A.

price comparision:
http://www.anandtech.com/cpu/showdoc.html?i=1927&p=2

business winstone2004:
http://www.anandtech.com/cpu/showdoc.html?i=1927&p=4

content creation winstone2004:
http://www.anandtech.com/cpu/showdoc.html?i=1927&p=5

div x encoding:
http://www.anandtech.com/cpu/showdoc.html?i=1927&p=6

3D-rendering:
http://www.anandtech.com/cpu/showdoc.html?i=1927&p=7

VisualC++ compile times:
http://www.anandtech.com/cpu/showdoc.html?i=1927&p=8

various game benchmarks:
http://www.anandtech.com/cpu/showdoc.html?i=1927&p=9
http://www.anandtech.com/cpu/showdoc.html?i=1927&p=10
http://www.anandtech.com/cpu/showdoc.html?i=1927&p=11
http://www.anandtech.com/cpu/showdoc.html?i=1927&p=12
http://www.anandtech.com/cpu/showdoc.html?i=1927&p=13
http://www.anandtech.com/cpu/showdoc.html?i=1927&p=14
http://www.anandtech.com/cpu/showdoc.html?i=1927&p=15
http://www.anandtech.com/cpu/showdoc.html?i=1927&p=16
http://www.anandtech.com/cpu/showdoc.html?i=1927&p=17

Notice how AMDs 1.6GHz Duron stomps all over Intels 2.6GHz Celeron.
1GHz slower clock, but 30% faster!

Are there any Con's to having a Celeron over a P4?


Yes, as you might see from the participating 1.8GHz P4.
It's damn slow too, but at least it's significantly faster than the
Celerons.

Is there a big difference between a Celeron 2.4 vs 2.5?


- ? No they're the same, they're slow. If that P4-Celeron was 6.5 GHz
it would still be slow.


ancra
  #5  
Old January 14th 04, 07:07 AM
andrew2000
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

I use Celerons often and have no problems - including video editing. they
are a bit slower in the benchmarks. but not noticeable in the "feel" of the
system. regardless of what you use be sure to use good quality ram - 512 mb
is a nice number.
"Taishi" wrote in message
.. .
I did some research on the internet about the CPU's in question. I see

that
the Celeron is a cheaper CPU than the P4.

Do anyone know the story behind the Celeron?

Has anyone seen a big difference between a Celeron 2.4 vs a Intel P4 PC?

Are there any Con's to having a Celeron over a P4?

Is there a big difference between a Celeron 2.4 vs 2.5?




  #6  
Old January 14th 04, 07:41 PM
Cari
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Here's a comparison...

Celeron 2.0Ghz..... 512mb PC133RAM

One Setiathome work unit.... 15 hours

P4 2.0Ghz..... 512mb RAM PC133 RAM

One Setiathome work unit 5 hours

P4 2.0Ghz 1Ghz PC2100 RAM

One Setiathome work unit 3.2 hours

No, I'm never even contemplating a Celeron procesor ever again.

Cari
www.coribright.com

"andrew2000" wrote in message
news:[email protected]
I use Celerons often and have no problems - including video editing. they
are a bit slower in the benchmarks. but not noticeable in the "feel" of
the
system. regardless of what you use be sure to use good quality ram - 512
mb
is a nice number.
"Taishi" wrote in message
.. .
I did some research on the internet about the CPU's in question. I see

that
the Celeron is a cheaper CPU than the P4.

Do anyone know the story behind the Celeron?

Has anyone seen a big difference between a Celeron 2.4 vs a Intel P4 PC?

Are there any Con's to having a Celeron over a P4?

Is there a big difference between a Celeron 2.4 vs 2.5?






  #7  
Old January 14th 04, 08:47 PM
Eddie Aftandilian
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

More anti-Celeron info:
http://www.anandtech.com/cpu/showdoc.html?i=1927

Anandtech's benchmarks show that a Celeron 2.6 GHz is slower than a P4 1.8
GHz in practically all tests.

"Cari" wrote in message
...
Here's a comparison...

Celeron 2.0Ghz..... 512mb PC133RAM

One Setiathome work unit.... 15 hours

P4 2.0Ghz..... 512mb RAM PC133 RAM

One Setiathome work unit 5 hours

P4 2.0Ghz 1Ghz PC2100 RAM

One Setiathome work unit 3.2 hours

No, I'm never even contemplating a Celeron procesor ever again.

Cari
www.coribright.com

"andrew2000" wrote in message
news:[email protected]
I use Celerons often and have no problems - including video editing.

they
are a bit slower in the benchmarks. but not noticeable in the "feel" of
the
system. regardless of what you use be sure to use good quality ram - 512
mb
is a nice number.
"Taishi" wrote in message
.. .
I did some research on the internet about the CPU's in question. I see

that
the Celeron is a cheaper CPU than the P4.

Do anyone know the story behind the Celeron?

Has anyone seen a big difference between a Celeron 2.4 vs a Intel P4

PC?

Are there any Con's to having a Celeron over a P4?

Is there a big difference between a Celeron 2.4 vs 2.5?








  #8  
Old January 14th 04, 10:28 PM
kony
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Wed, 14 Jan 2004 11:41:19 -0800, "Cari"
wrote:

Here's a comparison...

Celeron 2.0Ghz..... 512mb PC133RAM

One Setiathome work unit.... 15 hours

P4 2.0Ghz..... 512mb RAM PC133 RAM

One Setiathome work unit 5 hours

P4 2.0Ghz 1Ghz PC2100 RAM

One Setiathome work unit 3.2 hours

No, I'm never even contemplating a Celeron procesor ever again.

Cari
www.coribright.com



Not a realistic comparision of the CPUs though, only of SETI
performance, which is atypical. It would be fair to consider SETI
performance only if that is the only thing the system ever does... as
soon as it does something else, too, the results drastically differ...
SETI just happens to exploit some of the larger L2 cache, but only if
it STAYS in the cache.

Using a system normally will show much less performance penalty from a
Celeron, but certainly one doesn't belong in a system being built to a
mid or high-end price-point, but frankly, I wouldn't even consider a
P4 except for a high-end build, as the Athlons are much better bang
for the buck.
  #9  
Old January 14th 04, 11:44 PM
~misfit~
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

kony wrote:
On Wed, 14 Jan 2004 11:41:19 -0800, "Cari"
wrote:

Here's a comparison...

Celeron 2.0Ghz..... 512mb PC133RAM

One Setiathome work unit.... 15 hours

P4 2.0Ghz..... 512mb RAM PC133 RAM

One Setiathome work unit 5 hours

P4 2.0Ghz 1Ghz PC2100 RAM

One Setiathome work unit 3.2 hours

No, I'm never even contemplating a Celeron procesor ever again.

Cari
www.coribright.com



Not a realistic comparision of the CPUs though, only of SETI
performance, which is atypical.


SETI times are not atypical of CPU benchmarks. I have a book where I write
down benchmarks of every system I build. They include SETI times, CPUMark
and PC Mark 2002 among others. The CPU benchmarks show a distinct
correlation with SETI times. I suppose that you could say all synthetic
benchmarks are atypical.

It would be fair to consider SETI
performance only if that is the only thing the system ever does... as
soon as it does something else, too, the results drastically differ...
SETI just happens to exploit some of the larger L2 cache, but only if
it STAYS in the cache.


I (well, my g/f and I) have a Barton clocked at 2.2GHz and a Tbred at
2.1GHz, 512Kb and 256KB of L2 cache respectively, and the SETI times are
within 10% of each other, as are CPU Mark (210 and 195) and PC Mark 2002 CPU
benchmark (6,789 and 6,334). Even running SETI CLI while the machines are
being used for other things (including gaming) this 10% rule seems to remain
constant.

I benchmark every system I build, run Prime95 for 24 hours, run Prime and
SETI concurrently for 24 hours, then run SETI alone for 24 hours. Nothing
goes out of my door until it has done that error-free and maintained a
reasonable CPU/case temp. I *could* build a system and have it out the door
in hours but I hang onto them for nearly a week, until I'm satisfied, before
I let them go. That includes systems built from recycled parts or upgraded
sytems.

One caveat, I haven't built a P4-based Celeron machine. And won't. The last
Celeron system I built was a Tualatin. With the P4-based Cellys I believe
the slowness has a lot to do with cache latency as well as cache size.

Using a system normally will show much less performance penalty from a
Celeron,


If you consider gaming 'normal' then I'd have to disagree with you.

but certainly one doesn't belong in a system being built to a
mid or high-end price-point, but frankly, I wouldn't even consider a
P4 except for a high-end build, as the Athlons are much better bang
for the buck.


Agreed, especially the Barton 2500+, 90% of them run fine on a 200FSB using
the standard HSF (as long as case-cooling is set up properly) for XP3200+
speed. Some need a slight vcore boost, some will do 2.2GHz with no vcore
adjustment. I've only had one that wouldn't do 2.2GHz Prime95-stable at a
reasonable vcore.

The only time I would consider a P4 is for a dedicated video-editing machine
(SSE2). Not the sort of thing I build machines for ayway.
--
~misfit~


  #10  
Old January 15th 04, 02:42 AM
CBFalconer
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

~misfit~ wrote:

.... snip ...

I benchmark every system I build, run Prime95 for 24 hours, run
Prime and SETI concurrently for 24 hours, then run SETI alone for
24 hours. Nothing goes out of my door until it has done that
error-free and maintained a reasonable CPU/case temp. I *could*
build a system and have it out the door in hours but I hang onto
them for nearly a week, until I'm satisfied, before I let them
go. That includes systems built from recycled parts or upgraded
sytems.


How does one contact you?

--
Chuck F ) )
Available for consulting/temporary embedded and systems.
http://cbfalconer.home.att.net USE worldnet address!


 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
WD360 + Intel 875PBZ + XP Problem @drian General 0 November 6th 03 11:10 AM
notebook with Amd or Intel processor keitje General 4 September 28th 03 01:06 AM
P3-800 vs Celeron 1.4 --> video encoding time PS General 15 September 21st 03 06:14 PM
Celeron v Duron Tsun Szu General 5 August 2nd 03 08:37 PM
Do you happen to know Intel roadmap for CPUs? online General 3 July 10th 03 01:32 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 03:45 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2022, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2022 HardwareBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.