Celeron coppermine just as fast as P 3??

[Mustanggt]

I just got done reading Anandtechs review of the Celeron 600 coppermine and he states that if the chip was overclocked to 900 mhz it would be just as fast as a p 3 900 in most cases?? because the celeron would be running at 100 mhz fsb Is this true and does the same apply to the celeron 633??

 

[StickHead]

I doubt it. The P3s have 256k L2 vs the Celerons 128k, even though the Celerons is at full speed. I think the P3 would still be faster. If it's not than Intel screwed up big time

 

[Ogo]

And the Celeron's have increased latency on their L2 cache... just Intel's way of keeping them from out-pacing the Coppermines

 

[PliotronX]

Not only does the Copperon have half the cache, but it has half the associative pipelines as the Coppermine. A Copperon is equal to a Coppermine that is rated at 150-300Mhz lower. Example, a P3 700E beats a Copperon 566 at 850 or even 896 in every test. This is why the Durons are a much better choice than the Copperons, because they rival the Coppermines and cost even less than Copperons.

 

[Tonec]

For general windows apps the difference is not sigficant. Cache intensive tasks such as games are when the p3 really shines. Everyone knows the c2 is an underachiever but it does extend the life of those bx boards so its still a decent cpu for the money.

 

[Mustanggt]

I really cant see how anyone could tell the difference between the 2 cpus in real worls. only way is benchmark I mean all the games i play now Half/life etc play great with my c366@550 so hows me having a P 3 gonna make it play better than a celeron at 900 mhz??? I may be wrong but I think these games only need so many Mhz to run them perfectly and anything beyond that you will not see performance lift.

 

[Doh!]

If you're only talking about playing Halflife then I would agree with you. But gaming is not the only purpose of having a comp. system for many other readers here. I also have a 366@583 setup but my other Duron 1 Ghz setup definitely gives a perfomance boost while working with other applications.

 

[Mustanggt]

Doh the other applacations you said you see performace boost in im curios if you notice any performace boost just running at 700 mhz and then jumping up to higher mhz???

 

[Truro]

Mustang, your 366 and my 300a were/are as good as a PII. But we're talking about the CeleronII/PIII comparison. Intel crippled the Cel II so it wouldn't be a repeat of the celeron/PII deal. I just tried a 633 celeron at 950. Was about like a 650-700 PIII.

 

[superdave]

i have an old p3 500@560 slot one on an asus P3Bf mobo. Would I see any performance increase to speak of switching to a celeron2 600@900 with an msi slotket?

 

[RoadRuner]

you're old cpu is probably katmai, which means 512k cache at 280mhz.

by switching to the best overclock, 633 -> 950, you'll see definite speed increases. 128K of cache at 950mghz and a cpu running at that will spank the p3-560.

Like 70-80% faster.

My celeron 950 is about 10-15% slower than my duron @ 950, and that will spank a p3-850 easily. A celeron 950 is like a p3-800

 

[superdave]

RoadRunner,
Thanks for the info. I found a place that will sell me a celeron 600@900 guaranteed for about $150 shipped. With my luck if I went for the 633 retail box I would get a pig and be stuck at 633.

 

[Mustanggt]

?

 

[JimMc]

A CuMine is just as fast as a PIII at some of the more important tasks your PC will ever perform, for example RC5! , what more do you need? (PIII will smoke it by at least 20% in some games and graphics intensive programs )

 

[Fish54]

StickHead, I think you are a bit confused. The PIII Coppermine has it's 256k inclusive, 8(i think) way set associative cache on die at core speed, whereas the CeleronII has 128k, inclusive, 4-way set associative, cache on die at core speed. This along with the bus speed differences and the enhanced cache pipelines makes the Coppermine effectively 150mhz to 300mhz faster than a CeleronII, the difference narrows when increasing the CeleronII's bus to 100mhz, but it doesn't eliminate the problem.
-Fish

 

[StickHead]

Ah, that's how it goes. I'm an AMD fan, so I don't keep up on most the Intel crapola.

 

[Diesel21]

If you are not a hardcore gamer, do not crack rc5 or seti and have a cpu at 400-500 mhz, THEN STICK TO IT. I just upgradet my PII450 to a Celeron II 566@892 in windows and normal application there are no noticeable performance increase. My q3a and Counter-Strike runs a lot sweeter now and thats also the reason why I upgraded.

I am just tired of those people buying there 1ghz systems, GF2 and so on, and then using them for surf/e-mail and some office application. People should realize that its not like the old days where every cpu upgrade mattered. I would say Windows 2000 Pro runs just as sweet on a PII400 as a P3-1ghz.

To sum it up, if you are not a hardcore gamer craving for more frames per second stick with your good old system and buy some more RAM!

 

[Fish54]

Diesel, I disagree. I think that certain upgrades are certainly more noticable than others, but there is always a need for speed I upgraded from an AMD K6-III 400@450 to a Duron 600@927 and there is a huge difference in Windows apps. I run Win2k Pro and things are much quicker than they were with the K6-III. BTW, the K6-III had exceptional applications performance, so we can't say that the K6-III just sucked Anyways, I'm rambling. My point is that while in the grand scheme of things the power may not be necessary, it's always nice to have the fastest machine on the block...hehe BTW, my machine does crack keys all day long, and also the hardcore gamer notices less of a difference than the hardcore applications user since games are less cache dependent, which is not what people here have been saying. (This is apparent the most in comparing a K6-2 to a K6-III where the cache holds the K6-2 back in applications, but not so much in gaming.) Just my 2 cents

 

[Diesel21]

Fish54: My friend just upgraded from a K6-2 350 mhz to a T-Bird 800. He says he can't feel a difference in windows. I could not feel it going from 450 to 892 and my girlfriend can't feel anything going from 300 to 450.

In games, cracking and so on the difference is very very noticeable, but in normal surf, email office don't feel a thing.

Try upgrading only your cpu and keeping the same ammount of ram, same motherboard and so on, then you will know what I am talking about.

 

[RoadRuner]

i just surf, email, and web, dont really play any games. I enjoy having a fast computer, kinda like having a new car. why not?

its just money...

 

[Fish54]

roadrunner....word...