Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Celeron D 360 or Pentium D 805?

Last response: in Overclocking
Share
July 5, 2006 3:51:06 PM

I'm in the process of building a new computer and it looks like these two are pretty close to each other when you overclock them.

The 805 has an advantage in that it's dual-core. 3.6-3.8Ghz is about as fast as it gets with a big air cooling setup.

The 356 generates a *lot* less heat - and 4-5ghz seems doable(stock is 3.33Ghz!) with a good board. With its 512K L2 cache, it's comparable to a first generation Northwood/P4 from the tests that I've seen.(Mhz to Mhz it's about identical) A 5.0Ghz Northwood would have been quite an accomplishment - and still would do well today.

I've yet to see Tom's do a review of this processor, though. It seems like this might be the better option than the 805 as you don't hit the same power and thermal barriers as quickly. I hear that someone got theirs to nearly 6Ghz with water cooling, but that's a bit silly. :) 

EDIT: Yes, everyone says that it's no good for gaming, but so far I've only heard opinions - no hard numbers.
July 6, 2006 5:28:45 PM

And there went the knee-jerk response, right as predicted.

Thanks for playing, but I'm looking for real data this time instead of yet another opinion from the Peanut Gallery.
July 6, 2006 5:40:39 PM

well they might have about the same performance in single threaded apps, but D805 is dual core as you know. The thing is, the D805 overclocks like MAD. 3.8 on air.
Related resources
July 6, 2006 5:46:17 PM

I dont know a thing about the Celeron but I do have the 805D... but based on what you say the Celeron has a single core ? and less cache (wich is less of a problem becouse its one core ?) I guess if you just play games the Cely wouldnt be bad at all but I do have to say the dual core thing you cant explain it unless you see it in action :) 
a b à CPUs
July 6, 2006 6:01:43 PM

>>The 356 generates a *lot* less heat - and 4-5ghz seems doable(stock is 3.33Ghz!) with a good board. With its 512K L2 cache, it's comparable to a first generation Northwood/P4 from the tests that I've seen.(Mhz to Mhz it's about identical) A 5.0Ghz Northwood would have been quite an accomplishment - and still would do well today.<<

Until today, I questioned where I came up with the idea to buy a Javelin.
July 6, 2006 6:03:57 PM

X-labs reported that the 930 reached 4Ghz max, so it's not really much better than the 805. The 930 is also 50% more expensive than the 805 and $100 more than the 356.

The Celeron D 360, when it comes out, though, appears to be a wicked choice. 26x multiplier, about 75W consumption. With a 250Mhz FSB and water cooling, I'm sure some geek will get it to 6.5Ghz.

But at 200mhz fsb, which is nothing really special, that's 5.2Ghz on a pretty stock motherboard, with a good air-cooling setup. I bet it doesn't use more than 150W under full load. That's a huge amount less than the 805 uses. The 805 and 930 seem to be limited by power and heat well before they actually run out of speed.
July 6, 2006 6:30:49 PM

Sorry I'm late getting to this topic. The Naysayers had almost overtaken it. It's a miracle you were able to hold out this long!

On the topic at hand, here's a link you ALL might be interested in:

http://www.pcpop.com/doc/0/137/137950_2.shtml

Yes, the new Celeron Ds are a very formidable overclocker. They are king of the single core CPUs. I would put one up against an fx57 any day of the week. And for those who think the Celeron Ds will run hot, look at the temp of this cpu @ 5 GHz: 29C!!! Granted, it's using a huge heatsink, but it's still air cooled.

The big question is: can it compete with Intel's own cheap dual core 805? Well, that's not a simple black and white comparison. In single threaded apps, the Celeron D owns the 805 (and any other cpu from Intel and AMD for that matter) when both are overclocked, and even when both are at stock MHz the Celeron will pull ahead of the 805.

When you run into multithreaded stuff, the 805 is better when both are left stock. When both are at their max, the 805 is STILL better. At stock, the 805 performs in multithreaded apps as well as Intel's single-cored 3.8 GHz P4 (looks at Tom's encoding benchmarks in the D 805 article). That's quite a wallop. An overclocked 65nm Celeron D @ 5 GHz performs as well in a multithreaded app (encoding) as a Pentium D 930 at stock speeds.

So the choice really comes down to what you do on your computer, and how you operate it. The 805 allows me to record TV while encoding another program at the same time, with no loss in performance. I could even record TV and play a video game at the same time. This is something a Celeron D, or any single-core cpu, simply cannot do. However, if you don't encode or do other multithreaded apps, or if you don't run too many things at once ( multiple web browsers, music playing, open office document, unzipping a file simultaneously is STILL fine on a single core cpu...don't let anyone tell you different), then you would be better served with the Celeron D.

The only other factor to consider is cost. They're priced within $15 of each other. That's not enough to make me ditch the 805, but again I use a ton of multithreaded apps. Resale will be much better on the 805 than on the Celeron D 352/356/360. Most people won't pay of decent price for a Celeron, despite how good it performs, because of the stigma the name carries (these guys in this thread are a lovely example of what I'm talking about :roll: ). That is always something to keep in mind as well.

EDIT: I should mention availability. The new Celerons are almost vaporware here in the States. I don't know your location, but here in the US I still can't find an etailer with the new celerons in stock. Newegg does not even carry them at all. Mighty depressing, to say the least.

On top of all that, places like Toms and Anandtech have not given this new CPU any ink. How can people generate demand for a product if they don't know it's out there? I remember people not wanting to buy the D 805 because everyone was saying that 4 GHz was impossible because they were made out of faulty cores that could not run on the 200 MHz fsb. Most people thought they would be poor overclockers and perform very poor because of the low fsb. All it took was two articles to completely change the opinions of (most) people. An article on the new Celeron D would do the same.
July 6, 2006 6:36:14 PM

Quote:
X-labs reported that the 930 reached 4Ghz max, so it's not really much better than the 805. The 930 is also 50% more expensive than the 805 and $100 more than the 356.

The Celeron D 360, when it comes out, though, appears to be a wicked choice. 26x multiplier, about 75W consumption. With a 250Mhz FSB and water cooling, I'm sure some geek will get it to 6.5Ghz.

But at 200mhz fsb, which is nothing really special, that's 5.2Ghz on a pretty stock motherboard, with a good air-cooling setup. I bet it doesn't use more than 150W under full load. That's a huge amount less than the 805 uses. The 805 and 930 seem to be limited by power and heat well before they actually run out of speed.
Maybe 4GHz max on air, but the Pentium D 805 won't hit that with the stock cooler.
July 6, 2006 7:04:54 PM

I realize I'm also late getting in on this thread. But Plekto. Even despite the knee jerking responses. Here's another one that makes sense to anyone.

Overclocking a Celeron is alot like souping up a Honda Civic. Yeah you might be able to get it going at stupidly high RPMs (Clock Speed) but it still has little or no power. Even if you get the Celeron upto 5GHz it'll still be the equivalent of a P4 3.0GHz. You're better off buying something faster off the bat and overclocking that. IE the 805.

If you're concerned about thermal dissipation buy a board that supports the Core Duo and buy a Core Duo.
July 6, 2006 9:42:55 PM

Look at my link. At 5 GHz it outperforms a 3 GHz Opteron. It would completely smoke a 3 GHz P4. Gaming performance is still unknown unfortunately. That's because no tech review site (Tom's, Anandtech, etc) has done a proper review on it yet. Come on Tom's! Get to reviewing this cpu already! :x

EDIT: I just got back from the almighty Wal-Mart, and while I was there I stumbled upon a new HP computer using the Celeron D 352. That's the closest I've come so far in actually being able to purchase the new Celeron D here in the States.
July 6, 2006 10:01:25 PM

I couldn't care less about the technicalities of 805 vs 930 vs Celeron (Conroe will whip them all anyway but that's neither here nor there)

If you really want to go ahead and do an extreme overclock on a Celeron then be my guest, but seriously, are you actually going to bother with all that cooling, plus the fact that you might not get it at all stable past about 4ghz, just for a faster Celeron???
July 6, 2006 10:49:43 PM

Look at me!! I have a Honda Civic that produces 10hp @ 15,000RPM!!! Hey with the $15,000 I spent doubling the horsepower in my Civic I could've gone out and bought something decent right from the manufacturer!

Big whoop that a Celeron 5GHz might outperform an Opteron at 3GHz. What are the odds of getting that Celeron to 5GHz? Just get the 805 and o/c that. Or better yet... wait for Conroe and re-evaluate then.
July 6, 2006 11:25:06 PM

The odds i'd imagine to be around 80 to 90%, seeing as how it will hit 5 GHz AT STOCK VOLTAGE! The stock heatsink and fan are good enough, even at 5 GHz.

http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/showthread.php?t=10...

Nice Honda buddy. I've got a State Patrol Mustang that will eat it alive. :wink:

You keep pitching them, and I'll keep hitting them out of the park. :lol: 
July 7, 2006 12:10:18 AM

I don't see them being that high. I think one or two batches will be and then it'll sorda plateau.

As to the Honda comment I was being sarcastic. Although rumor mill has it those are the specs of the new S2000. It might even have VTec.
July 7, 2006 12:20:59 AM

how the hell can u say that a 5ghz celeron will be the same as a 3ghz p4???
go to hkepc and look up their article. superpi times on the cely @5ghz even pawn my athlon64 @2.6ghz

to the op: get the cely if u want it so much
July 7, 2006 12:36:16 AM

joefriday is completly right, you should work out what you generally want to do with the computer, ie. games, photoshop, maya, recording tv etc. When you are fairly certain of what you want to do, read through all of these comments and you should get your answer. Good Luck
July 7, 2006 1:43:20 AM

THE END

http://www.madshrimps.be/?action=getarticle&number=3&artpage=1805&articID=437

So "Overall thoughts


Pentium D 805

The price of this CPU is extremely low which makes it a winner as a budget CPU, even when not considering overclocking, a Dual Core CPU at this price is the best thing Intel has done up until now this year! They’ve also included a better standard Heatsink/Fan combo which supports auto fan speed adjustment, allowing the Fan to be quite silent when running idle. For the price this D 805 runs almost as fast as the best out there when overclocked.

The draws backs are its high power consumption and when overclocking you’ll have to invest in better cooling to keep the temperatures down. The Asus P5LD2 limits the overclocks to ~200FSB, going any higher you loose the SATA ports.


Celeron D 356

With its smaller manufacturing process this CPU runs cooler and uses less power, when you step on its tail it overclocks like crazy even with modest air cooling, reaching speeds which could only be had with sub zero cooling one year ago. However its reduced cache size makes it slower than the competition even when running at close to 5Ghz! The new Celeron D will make an excellent competitor for AMD’s Sempron which has been regarded as the budget-friendly CPU… until now?"
July 7, 2006 1:48:29 AM

I excluded that review because it is horribly executed. The only benchmark for the Celeron D 356 was for 3Dmark. Hmmm....a synthetic benchmark pitting a single core cpu against two dual core cpus. To base any conclusions on that benchmark would be setting yourself up for ridicule.
July 7, 2006 2:04:14 AM

Well it answered the op so i dont see why it should be excluded, its not hard by the way to go look at some other single core cpu scores tested by madshrimps or at futuremark.
July 7, 2006 5:53:48 AM

Okay, this site ate my post again. So I'll try again.

Thanks for the URL. It got 10K for a 3d Mark 2005 score. With a very decent 200fsb/5 gig setting. This seems to be the sweet spot for this model, as almost any board will do 200fsb. Well, any good board will.

It doesn't require:
- huge cooling with the attendant huge fans of incessant noise(tm) 40 db for fans vs 24db...
- special 4-phase motherboard
- special memory or cooling on said memory
- a 400W power supply could probably run a system.

In short, for me it fulfills my old-school acid-test for overclocking. Spending $200 in accessories to overclock versus nothing at all and a $35 cooler is a definite problem. It needs to be cheap AND effective. KISS - and the 805 isn't simple from what I've heard. Possible, yes, but you'll spend as much on the 805 and hardware to get it to 3.8Ghz as you'll spend with a 930 that overclocks just as well. And use a lot of power in a year, stress everything else from high heat, and have to put your fans on full speed 100% of the time.

Now, true, it is a single core, but dual-core is overrated. I have one at work, and other than the times that I'm hammering it with a lot of work at once(and even then it's only a minute or two!), it runs 80-90% as fast with the dual-core shut off. It's really not the panacea that Intel is making it to be. Sure, it's nice, but not required. We survived for over a decade with single processors(well, 98% of us) and still had a decent time gaming.

Intel finally, at the last minute, has made a Celeron that it should have all along. It appears as if Intel finally has an AMD competitor. For $100, it's a steal. The 360 has better characteristics as well, so 5ghz out of it should be very low heat - probably 30C. The 356 and 360 appear to have D0 stepping, so it's a serious win-win for DIYers. That's only a 35% overclock to hit 10K 3d marks. Sign me up.

EDIT:
What people seem to be forgetting is that it is functionally identical to an older P4 (400/533 model) almost Mhz for Mhz. The 3.06@5ghz at that link that was posted farther down in the discussion was basically a tie with the Celeron at ~5Ghz(4.8IIRC).

If I could have bought a 5ghz Northwood three years ago for $80, I'd have dropped a gold brick in my pants. That's not bad at all. 512K cache come to the rescue!

BTW the 360@233fsb=6Ghz. SOME boards will be able to do this. I can't wait to see the results in a couple of months.
July 7, 2006 6:24:22 AM

I know what you're saying. I was facing the same decision a couple weeks ago. If you'll really be happy with the Celeron D, then it is the cpu for you. I chose the other option, and upgraded my Dell with an 805. I was actually satisfied with the performance of the 2.4B I was using previously, except when I would encode some video files. It took a very long time. Since the Dell mobo would not support Prescotts, I would need to install a new mobo anyway, so I chose to upgrade to socket 775. The 805 was the right cpu for me. Hopefully the Celeron D will be the right cpu for you as well. :wink:
July 7, 2006 10:05:32 PM

Just get yourself a solid P75. Far lower power consumption than the Celeron and far more stable than the 805. You see... when you remove unwanted extensions such as SSE, SSE2, MMX and you get right down to it, the Pentium 75 isn't so much different from the 356 and the 805. Now... factor in the lower bus speed. This allows for more ACCURATE data transfers. See... once you overclock or you reach bus speeds in excess of 33MHz you start losing accuracy and error checking becomes more of an issue. Go with the P75.
July 8, 2006 7:35:42 AM

Well of course a P75 is better!!!! :roll: It wasn't on his options list, so I didn't mention it. DUH!!!! :wink:
July 8, 2006 10:12:44 AM

Quote:
... OC'ing a 356 to 5Ghz will still require a lot of cooling and electricity, too. Again, get the 356 if you want. Both will OC extremely well, perform well, and provide heating for the winter.


Actually, the napkin math calculations put the 360 at 5Ghz(190fsb)at roughly 120W under a full load. That's a lot less than the 805 at 3.8Ghz, and not much more than many stock P4s.

The cooler is already decided, though. I'm going to be using the newest Zalman that looks like a barrel. The fans - Silenx to keep the noise down. 72cfm @14db. It'll hit 5Ghz with barely a 30% overclock and should be nearly silent doing it. I think I'll still need a heater in the winter :) 

And I'll be able to upgrade later on to a really decent processor once the prices come down out of the stratosphere.
July 8, 2006 11:09:20 AM

I don't believe Buget CPU's are crap! I have often used Celerons' or Duron CPU's. I would love to be able to buy the latest and greatest but in the real world a lot of us have no choice but to buy buget.
I have been building and using PC's since 1994 and most of the time the Celeron or Duron will do the job.
It all comes down to the buget.
Rule of thumb is always buy the best you can afford. :roll:
July 8, 2006 11:37:12 AM

I've never used a good Duron, and they've never 'done the job' well at all.
July 8, 2006 11:38:35 AM

I can't find the Celery D 360 online anywhere, so I'm using the Celery D 355. Let's do a quick specs comparison.

Pentium D 805: 2.66GHz (x2), 533MHz FSB, 2x1MB L2 cache, 90nm
Celeron D 360: 3.33GHz, 533MHz FSB, 256KB L2 cache, 90nm

The Celeron will perform better in single-threaded apps and apps that like a lot of clock speed. The D805 will slaughter it in multitasking, though. If you overclock the D805 by upping the FSB (the multiplier is locked), you'll gain more CPU bandwidth, which will speed up your whole system.

Or, as others have said, you could get a Pentium D 930 which will run cooler, and overclock better than the D805.
July 8, 2006 11:51:42 AM

I've ran both 650MHZ Duron CPU and a 1300MHZ Duron CPU, I would loved to been able to afford Athlons or P3, P4's at the time but the have both never missed a beat, let me down at anytime. :) 
I do just about everything with my PC's
The 650's now being used by my oldest daugther, it's a bit slow now but still runs trouble free.
As for Celerons, were I work we sell stacks to business for basic POS and back room jobs. In over 5 years of selling them, No complaints. :D 
July 8, 2006 11:57:34 AM

Well, I've never had a Celeron or Duron fail on me, although I've only had to RMA one CPU ever.

You can't be serious saying you can do 'just about everything' with a Duron 1.3? My dad runs a Duron 1.1 that has 64kb L2 bestowed upon it and it's slower than the P3-500 that came before it. It barely runs Opera, it hangs for 2 minutes every time he plugs in his iPod and playing music is like running Prime95 on it. It does SuperPi 1M in about 3:30 to boot.
July 8, 2006 12:29:41 PM

Prehaps I'm not a power user, but I've used it for games, burning DVD's, downloading pictures, ripping music, just about everything realy. :) 
I'm not saying I wouldn't like a new system. (Am in planning for new, hopfully AM2 5000+ dual core running Windows Vista) What I am saying is a lot of people who have budgets must buy less then they would like.
Unless your a super power user you can usally run quite happly with a Buget CPU.
I have been using PC since 1979 (TRS80 with green screen monitor and tape drive) Love computers, left a great paying trades job to do something I love, build and use computers, Its fantastic, but sometimes we have to make do with what we have got.
Yes I agree, If you have the money go with the Pentium, but if things are a bit tight and you don't need the power the Celeron will do. :) 
(-8

My Kids Computer is a 550MHZ P3 Cpu with an ASUS Motherboard, My 1300 Duron runs on a el cheapo ECS Motherboard. The Duron kills the P3 in every area.
July 9, 2006 10:51:17 AM

Quote:
I can't find the Celery D 360 online anywhere, so I'm using the Celery D 355. Let's do a quick specs comparison.

Pentium D 805: 2.66GHz (x2), 533MHz FSB, 2x1MB L2 cache, 90nm
Celeron D 355: 3.33GHz, 533MHz FSB, 256KB L2 cache, 90nm


The 356 and 360 are 65nm chips with 512K cache, and D0 setpping to keep them quite cool. It's the processor Intel should have made five years ago.

The 360 is coming out in two months, give or take. The 356 is already out. 3.6Ghz vs 3.33Ghz, so not a real difference. The 356 uses maybe 75W in normal use, which is crazy low. I'm planning on using it to overclock to ~5.2Ghz(~200fsb).

It's a whole new game. Under $100 - gets a 3DMArk 2005 score of 10,000+
July 9, 2006 11:52:42 AM

Post up some benchmarks so we can compare. I'll run anything you want on my 805D. (4.4ghz)

Not being an ass, just wanna see some numbers. I've been looking around, and no one really posts up bench numbers.
July 9, 2006 12:57:52 PM

I have read through this thread and have to ask, why did you even bother asking which processor when you are defending the Celeron so much? You should just go ahead and buy it because you are talking it up so much and you already have your mind set on it.
July 9, 2006 8:23:39 PM

I have been following this thread for a little now and my question is I am a do it all on a computer. From gaming to everything else, which processor would be good for me a Pentium D 805 @3.4 or a Celey at @5.0 im thinking the Pentium d More Cache.
July 9, 2006 8:42:04 PM

You'll need fantastic cooling to hit 5GHz on a Celeron.
July 9, 2006 8:51:29 PM

yeah i know, I was just wondering which chip I sould get. I think im going with the 805, the celerons just seem to light in raw power.
July 9, 2006 9:46:23 PM

yeah true. Another reason i was considering the 805 was becuase of conroe comming out and I need a cpu now. I was just thinking of the 805 to 'hold me over' a bit.
July 9, 2006 10:09:12 PM

Quote:
Celerons are just plain crap, and the Pentium D 805 is also; go for the Pentium D 930, it's only a little more money, dual core, 2mb of L2 cache per core, and overclocks like a beast thanks to 65nm.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E1681...


Aye, i had a D805 @ 3.8 but it used FAR too much heat, so i replaced it with a D930 which is nice and comfortable at 4.2 on air.
July 9, 2006 10:16:16 PM

Quote:
Just get yourself a solid P75. Far lower power consumption than the Celeron and far more stable than the 805. You see... when you remove unwanted extensions such as SSE, SSE2, MMX and you get right down to it, the Pentium 75 isn't so much different from the 356 and the 805. Now... factor in the lower bus speed. This allows for more ACCURATE data transfers. See... once you overclock or you reach bus speeds in excess of 33MHz you start losing accuracy and error checking becomes more of an issue. Go with the P75.


lol?
July 10, 2006 2:21:42 AM

Quote:
You'll need fantastic cooling to hit 5GHz on a Celeron.


So I guess you're saying the stock Intel hsf is "fantastic cooling"? :?
July 10, 2006 4:55:46 PM

Quote:
You'll need fantastic cooling to hit 5GHz on a Celeron.


So I guess you're saying the stock Intel hsf is "fantastic cooling"? :?

Well, Intel HSF are rather good after the Prescott "incident" as i like to call it.
July 10, 2006 6:08:18 PM

Going from 3.6Ghz to 5Ghz is quite reasonable for overclocking. 35% is quite reasonable. A simple Zalman fan should handle this without even flinching. 6ghz would likely require water cooling, though, which is not cost-effective.

Yes - the 930 is a good choice, but IT'S TWICE THE PRICE. I'm not paying $100 more for a small speed increase.

As for the "defending" part - I wanted results and thankfully someone posted them. The knee-jerk "Celeron bad - P4 good" response by half of you here was expected, though. In my book, if it can get a 3D mark score of 10,000 it's not junk, no matter who makes it.
July 10, 2006 6:12:13 PM

It's been 5 days and you seem very sure of the Celeron - have you ordered yet? (Better still got it up and running)
July 10, 2006 6:29:31 PM

I originally was going to buy a 356 but I'm waiting until the 360 comes out. When that happens, I'll make the system.
July 10, 2006 7:23:30 PM

Even then
Quote:
At 5GHz, it manages to outclass a 2MB L2 Pentium 4 670 running at 3.8GHz, pretty easily.
So it’s able to outperform a PRESCOTT clocked 1.2Ghz slower; I still say Pentium D 930.
July 11, 2006 12:17:34 PM

Quote:
Even then At 5GHz, it manages to outclass a 2MB L2 Pentium 4 670 running at 3.8GHz, pretty easily.
So it’s able to outperform a PRESCOTT clocked 1.2Ghz slower; I still say Pentium D 930.

Word.
July 11, 2006 5:25:37 PM

No one has a Celeron so we can some comparisons?
July 13, 2006 4:59:01 AM

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

well the guy who posted the question before me answers the question already what processor you should get.

my thoughts, get the 805 d , no point of spending money on 930 .

how much of a increase is from the 805 to 930?
!