celeron 1.7 g

[sqldba]

I am planning on purchasing a new celeron 1.7 g in the next few days. Originally, I was going to get a Celeron 1.1 and the guy at the store convinced me to get this instead. He claims that the performance will be much better. With the CPU being higher and the bus speed increasing from 100 to 400 all sounds good. What worries me is the cache going from 256 to 128. I addressed this with him and he told me that the CPU and bus speed will definately make it much faster than the older model. Any thoughts???
Thanks in advance.

 

[chuck232]

Look at these:<A HREF="http://www17.tomshardware.com/cpu/02q2/020515/index.html" target="_new">http://www17.tomshardware.com/cpu/02q2/020515/index.html</A>, <A HREF="http://www17.tomshardware.com/cpu/02q2/020612/index.html" target="_new">http://www17.tomshardware.com/cpu/02q2/020612/index.html</A>, <A HREF="http://www.anandtech.com/cpu/showdoc.html?i=1622" target="_new">http://www.anandtech.com/cpu/showdoc.html?i=1622</A>, and <A HREF="http://www.xbitlabs.com/cpu/celeron-1800/" target="_new">http://www.xbitlabs.com/cpu/celeron-1800/</A>

As you can tell, the Celeron 1.7 is significantly faster than a 1.1GHz celeron, especially pair that up with some PC2100 DDR RAM. It is also more expensive mind you.

My firewall tastes like burning.

 

[AMD_Man]

Plus, you can probably get the Celeron 1.7GHz to 2.26GHz. Due to the limited cache, I would always recommend at least PC2100 DDR with the Celeron 1.7GHz. PC2700 will provide an extra 5-10% performance boost for only a bit more money.

In my opinion, these are the best low-budget core components:

Celeron 1.7GHz @ 2.26GHz
256MB Samsung PC2700
MSI 645 Ultra

<b><i>"A penny saved is a penny earned!"</i></b>

 

[eden]

If he is cash strapped, methinks a Duron setup would still be much better. It won't perform AS good but seeing as they are both budget systems, price is the most crucial point here.

Otherwise AXP 1700+ has now a price to lick your tongue on!

--
Intel and AMD sitting under a tree, P-R-O-C-E-S-S-I-N-G!

 

[FatBurger]

If this is an intereim system though, the Celeron might be a good choice. The stuff AMD_Man listed is really cheap, and the processor can be replaced down the road for a good upgrade.

<font color=blue>Hi mom!</font color=blue>

 

[AMD_Man]

Yup with DDR333 and a 533MHz FSB (processor running at 2.26GHz), I would say it would match a 2GHz Willamette P4 in performance, if not faster.

<b><i>"A penny saved is a penny earned!"</i></b>

 

[eden]

I'd agree but has he specified yet if he's willing to overclock?
Usually budget systems in the long run are rarely upgraded by the same mobo and socket. In Intel's case, I don't think he will upgrade to another budet CPU in the future, which will use the same Socket, lord knows if Intel is generous enough to stick with S478!
And even in the Wilamette 2GHZ's area, the XP1700 is still gonna beat both, as well as giving a huge plus in any FPU intensive app. (Let's not forget the extremly cheap priced ECS K7S5A and current DDR RAM pricing) But I won't go further, it depends on the guy's money budget, trust in either company AND overclock interest.

--
Intel and AMD sitting under a tree, P-R-O-C-E-S-S-I-N-G!

 

[sqldba]

I should have been more specific about all this. I am an MS SQL Database Administrator. This pc is for my personal use at home. I am totally clueless about hardware except for what the hardware guys at work tell me they are going to do to increase performance on my servers. I have yet to play a game on my home pc. (I know that 3d stuff makes a difference as to which computer to buy) I will be using this for basic home pc stuff. (word, surfing the web, having fun with the web cam) The web cam performance is a big concern of mine. I am currently using a P2 333 mhz. Most of the time its fine for what I do. Of course kind of slow, but I manage. As for brand preference, Intel is it for me. (even if its a Celeron) I have talked to all the hardware guys at my work and they all hate AMD's due to reliability and compatability. Im sure other people have other opinions, but I know and trust their judgement. Also, by the time I need a new computer, mine will probably not be upgradeable. As for the DDR ram, Im so cheap that Im getting the SD model so I can keep the 320mb of pc 133 that I already have.

<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by sqldba on 06/18/02 08:01 PM.</EM></FONT></P>

 

[sqldba]

I forgot to say:
If overclocking( dont forget Im clueless here, please be nice) is something that can increase performance for no cost, with no chance of being harmfull, and doesnt take much hardware reconfiguration, then sure, Ill do it.

 

[chuck232]

It <i>could</i> be harmful if you get too carried away. Just put it to a certain point where it can't go any further, put the FSB back a couple MHz and you're all set! As for the overclocking AMD_Man, it'll be hard to get it to 2.26GHz I'd think, since x-bit labs could only get it to 2.15Ghz. Oh well you can always try.

What's the deal with lampshades, I mean it's a lamp, why would you want a shade?

 

[AMD_Man]

Err, SDRAM? You'll kill the performance. Better get a 1 or 1.1GHz Celeron and overclock it to 1.33GHz ro 1.47GHz respectively. The 1.7GHz Celeron is based on the Pentium 4 Willamette which loses up to 30% in performance with SDRAM. The older Celeron is designed for SDRAM and doesn't get hurt by it.

<b><i>"A penny saved is a penny earned!"</i></b>

 

[sqldba]

Not to sound like I dont beleive you, but would anyone else agree/ disagree that in this case a 1.1 would be better than the 1.7?

 

[Matisaro]

The p4 archetecture requires higher clockspeed to defeat the p3 archetechture, and a 1.4ghz p3 celly would in fact ass rape a 1.7ghz p4 celeron.

The Cash Left In My Pocket,The BEST Benchmark

 

[sqldba]

What does that mean to someone like me? 1.1 or 1.7??? (very hardware illiterate)

 

[Matisaro]

1.1ghz
1.7ghz

1100mhz
1700mhz

The cores work differently, so what the p3 celly can do in a single cycle may take the p4 celly 1.5 or 2 cycles to complete.


Thusly a p3 celleron@ 1.4ghz will be able to easily outperform a p4 celly@1.7ghz.


PS: your tech friends dont know what they are talking about when it comes to amd, they are neither less compatable nor more unstable(with a good mobo) than their intel counterparts. Do me a favor and inform them they should read up more and just because the management is anti amd dosent mean they have to be.



The Cash Left In My Pocket,The BEST Benchmark

 

[sqldba]

You lost me on that one. How did the p3 get to 1.4 ghz? Im not trying to sound disrespectful. Just trying to understand. Did you mean 1100 mhz?

 

[AMD_Man]

The 1.7GHz Celeron is only good with DDR RAM. With SDRAM you're just wasting performance. Yes, I agree with Matisaro, you might want to look into a AMD system. They are 100% compatible and reliable. I'm sure 99% of the people here will agree with me. Only AMDMeltdown and Fugger will disagree, but I doubt they've actually worked with AMD processors.

<b><i>"A penny saved is a penny earned!"</i></b>

 

[chuck232]

The celeron was made on many different cores. P3 celeron is basically a celeron based off the P3 core, a P4 celeron based off the P4 core. The Celeron 1.4GHz (made off the P3 core) ass rapes the Celeron 1.7GHz (made off the P4 core) according to Mat.

What's the deal with lampshades, I mean it's a lamp, why would you want a shade?

 

[Matisaro]

Someone mentioned overclocking.


A 1.1ghz celleron should perform close to a 1.7ghz p4 celleron on ddr memory. Near tie imo.

The Cash Left In My Pocket,The BEST Benchmark

 

[chuck232]

Really? From the the stuff I saw, the Celeron 1.7 with DDR RAM even outdos the Celeron 1.4 in a lot of benches on that review at x-bit labs.

What's the deal with lampshades, I mean it's a lamp, why would you want a shade?

 

[ritesh_laud]

The p4 archetecture requires higher clockspeed to defeat the p3 archetechture, and a 1.4ghz p3 celly would in fact ass rape a 1.7ghz p4 celeron.

In many apps it would, but not all by a long shot. Apps requiring high memory bandwidth (Quake 3) or supporting SSE2 would show an advantage for the Celeron. There are some benchmarks supporting this that I just read today, but I'm too lazy to find and link it.

Ritesh

 

[lhgpoobaa]

unless of course that celleron is equipped with SDRAM. then it will suck like an overclocked vacuum!

i think he should save up a bit more cash and get a P4 1.6A or 1.8A instead.

4 times more cache, runs cooler. runs faster

<font color=blue>All religions are true, for a given value of 'true' - Terry Pratchett.</font color=blue>

 

[eden]

And overclocks to have a performance almost twofold the budget CPUs would do.

--
Intel and AMD sitting under a tree, P-R-O-C-E-S-S-I-N-G!

 

[eden]

Mat are you sure you know what you just said?
1.1GHZ vs 1.7GHZ? I hope you meant SDR memory for Cel 1.7GHZ otherwise I completly disagree, no 1.1GHZ Celeron can possibly compete the 1.7GHZ if the 1.3GHZ barely makes it.
UNLESS you meant OCing the 1.1GHZ, but even then the thing draws a lot of heat.

Hell the 1.7GHZ OCed to 2.26GHZ becomes a house heater.

--
Intel and AMD sitting under a tree, P-R-O-C-E-S-S-I-N-G!

 

[Matisaro]

I meant with sdram, didnt I say so?

The Cash Left In My Pocket,The BEST Benchmark