Celeron 2.0 vs. P4 2.4 comparison

[vividere]

I just found Tom's site and was happy to see it and looked forward to comparing the above two processors. To my dismay the charts I found had the P4 2.4 on them, but not the Celeron line of processors.

I currently am running a Red Hat Linux server with the Celeron 2.0 in it with a GB of RAM. I am having some CPU load issues with the morning cron runs. I am trying to determine if it is my log setup or if in fact the CPU isn't powerful enough. The next step up is the P4 2.4. I am trying to get a feeling for how much better then P4 will do vs. the Celeron. I miss the old Intel MIPS charts that at least gave you a starting point for making a comparison.

Even if no one an give me a hard figure comparison, I would like some best guesses for how much better the P4 can handle the lot processing on the server vs the Celeron.

Thanks,

Lew

 

[hashv2f16]

Well that would be because the Celeron 2.0 is so crap that it only deserves being hit with a very large hammer or being overclocked so much that it explodes right off the board.

Remembering that it's part of Intel's budget line of processors.
I've been stuck using a Celeron 2.5GHz since 3 years back now and it still sucks as much as the day I got it. Although I didn't notice it then. After the Athlon 650 it was amazing!!

The Pentium 4 2.4GHz should be almost literally twice as fast. Well not exactly but it will feel like it.

 

[vividere]

I am surprised but no one else has contributed to this answer. BTW, instead of a P4 2.4 I ended up with a 2.6.

This is being used in a Red Hat Linux server box. I am curious as to how much better CPU peformance the 2.6 would have vs. a Celeron 2.0 and in particular how much better the P4 can be expected to do with the server LOAD which normally mimics CPU need.

Still hoping someone can show me a Celeron 2.0 to P4 2.6G comparison test or spect. I miss the old Intil Icomp ratings so you could directly compare the two, at least at a MIPS level.

 

[lakedude]

Perhaps the reason you are not getting any help is that:

1) You are running linux while most of the rest of the world does not.

2) You are asking about old CPUs that have slipped off the bottom of the charts.

You might have better luck on a linux forum.

Of course a 2.4 (or 2.6) P4 is going to be better than a 2.0 Cel (God I hope so).

 

[vividere]

I run Windows on my PC, BUT most servers run some variation of Unix.

I just bought the P4 so they are still being made, even if not bleeding edge.

I was hoping that there would at least be test data that was run on both, when they were current processors. A common test ran on both that would give me a way to compare the two. I wasn't expecting either processor to be tested recently, but at some point they were "king of the hill". Back in 1996 we would have died and gone to heaven for a Celeron 2.0.

I threw the Linux angle in in hopes to get better info, but either way, I would be happy just to get the equivalent of Icomp data on them, something that compared them evenly. I realize in some ways the P4 exceeds, especially in moving bigger hunks of data because of it's bigger L2.

Thanks anyway.

 

[endyen]

Part of the problem is that you didn't say which P4. Do you mean a P4a @ 100/400 fsb, a P4a @ 133/533 fsb with 1 meg cache, a P4b @ 133/533 fsb, or a P4c @ 200/800 fsb.
As you can guess, there is a lot of difference in impact, especially for your use.
It is also difficult to compare, for linux server use, since neither are actually server chips.
For your use, the best would be had by the P4c, giving average load times of about 1/3rd of that celery.

 

[vividere]

Thanks for the reply...

I am not given the specifics on the processors...all I know is my old one was a Celeron 2.0 and the new one is a P4 2.6G...

I don't know which one...even the worse 2.6 I am guessing or hoping or assuming it will be 2X what the old processor was.

Lew

 

[vividere]

BTW, if it helps, the P4 2.6G was used to replace a Celeron 1.7 so whatever server motherboard would have supported the 1.7 would have been used for the 2.6G.

 

[lakedude]

Ok I found a chart that has the 2.0 Cel and the 2.4 and 2.6 GHz P4. Of course the comparison is using XP not Linux but at least it is a start.

http://www.tomshardware.com/2003/02/17/benchmark_marathon/

Using mp3 coding as an example of performance (times in seconds):

Cel 1.7 145sec
Cel 2.0 127sec
P4 2.4 96sec
p4 2.6 90sec

I have no idea how this would relate to a Linux enviroment.

 

[crazywheels]

it really wouldn't matter what os you are using, a p4 perform better than a celeron, this server you are running how many computers are you running off your linux machine