Who seriously games with a Duron or Celeron? [Archive]

tony_j15

12-20-2002, 05:00 PM

Tony,

don't suppose you still have that comp? That might be a prime contender in my "KyroII + PIII 866(oc'ed to 871) kick,uh, TNT2M64" thread...

Actually, I do. It is the one I use for internet(like right now). For gaming, I now have a XP2000+ rig with 256DDR and 60gb HD. Sadly, I am using a TNT2 vid card. It gets a whole 995 3dmarks!:rolleyes: I should get a new vid card after christmas. You could probably consider me as one of the "poor folks" as I am only 16 and it has taken me from april 01 till november 02 for my gaming rig to get finished. I dont have my drivers licence yet, so the only job I had this summer was lawn mowing.

maje87c

12-20-2002, 05:12 PM

I guess i forgot to mention that every time I have a friend over, we 1v1 in half-life, using the following systems:

Athlon XP 1600+
512 MB SDRAM pc133
Geforce2 MX 100/200 64MB

and for my low end celeron....

Celeron 333 OC'ed to 400 mHz(note: half life does not work when this processor is unclocked)
Trident 3dImage AGP 4MB
64MB SDRAM pc100

I still don't now how in the hell it is able to run half-life so well.

zybch

12-20-2002, 05:50 PM

One of my PCs is a Duron 1200 with a GeForce4 MX 400 card and it runs the majority of games without any problems. Yes, usually I run at 800x600, but when you are in the middle of the game, running around trying to frag anything that moves, you really can't notice the difference between 800x600 and 1280x1024, your brain is concentrating on other things.
The only game I have to run without the graphics settings on high is Need For Speed: hot pursuit 2. The anistropic filtering is just a bit too much for this machine.
Games like quake3, unreal tornament/2003 all work very nicely.

Someone Stupid

12-20-2002, 06:30 PM

I have a Duron 1200@1400 (100x1400). I have 640 megs of Nanya PC133. Get around 1100 in SiSoft Bandwidth test. An eVGA g4 4200 ti 308/558 clock.

I can play games in 1024x768 (or whatever the last number is) in max details, etc with 30 fps being the lowest the frames drop, they usually stay around 40. FSAA is enabled as Quincunx. Granted I had a 1600 in there twice before, one died from the waterpump deciding to take the day off and the peltier deciding to keep on working, the other was from how graciously the movers handled my computer, the block BROKE off the mb). So after FINALLY getting them to replace it, I threw in my Duron I had as a spare incase the comp died before I had gptte a second cpmp that was above 486 speeds. :) There was a decent decrease from the Duron from the 1600 Palomino's. But it was still running quite well for a secondary system, so I saw no need in spending anymore money on it than what was necessary to get it up and running again.

I only play games on it when I'm busy doing stuff on my workstation as well. Just went from Intel to AMD after my Northwood died in two days (it was running for months) after being under a Prometia. From reading about SDNS - it sure as hell sounds like it. First it wouldn't boot, resetted the CMOS, clocked it down a bit. Ran fine, then locked up, on bootup I could make it to the BIOS, dropped it again down to almost it's stock, then a few hours later it died. Overpriced POS Intel. Haven't overclocked the 2700 TredB yet, waiting for a good board to come out - been running on a cheap board in the meantime.

Playing games on the workstation then the old comp is a dizzying experience to say the least. But at 30 to 40 fps, games are highly playable - admittedly it's not as smooth as the 2700, but for the cost to performance, it wins that one. :)

TheMan

12-20-2002, 06:49 PM

I've got a Duron 1ghz...Seems to work fine for my gaming needs
And i have a Radeon 7000 PCI 32 mb.....(though i'd like to upgrade it to an AGP) when i find a cheaper one around)

Games i play are UT2K3.....Nascar Thunder...F1 2K2...Sports Car GT
And i'll be adding a few more games to my colelction soon enogh

I like to set my detail settings to the best or however close the Vid card will let me..

morpheus kain

12-20-2002, 07:31 PM

I'm 15, I have a PIII 450 and 192mb of ram, and a Geforce 2 TI. Don't dog us poor teenagers, it's not fair!:(

Giblet Plus!

12-20-2002, 08:00 PM

I'm 18, and my 2nd computer is a Tbird 900 running a voodoo 3. (soon to be a voodoo 5) :p

morpheus kain

12-20-2002, 08:09 PM

How about you box it up and send it to me for Christmas? You know feel the Christmas spirit man!

$1500-P4 gamer

12-20-2002, 09:31 PM

"Just went from Intel to AMD after my Northwood died in two days (it was running for months) after being under a Prometia. From reading about SDNS - it sure as hell sounds like it. First it wouldn't boot, resetted the CMOS, clocked it down a bit. Ran fine, then locked up, on bootup I could make it to the BIOS, dropped it again down to almost it's stock, then a few hours later it died. Overpriced POS Intel. Haven't overclocked the 2700 TredB yet, waiting for a good board to come out - been running on a cheap board in the meantime."

Hmmm, first of all P4's oclock higher than XP's so expect worse not better. Second of all I dont understand your outlandish biasedness. I mean, duh you are oclocking here. Was the cpu not stable and fine at the retailed speed that it was GARUNTEED to run at. Was it not you who dissed the warenty claims. And then you are mad and call them cheap for not providing 2x the mhz it was sold at. Well-guess your name says it all if thats really how you feel. Come on I thought higher of you than that. You cant really mean what you said there.:p

$1500-P4 gamer

12-20-2002, 09:35 PM

On topic of thread. I built my dad a Duron morgan core 1gig with a msi k7t turbo2 LE mobo ATI 7500 and 512mb sdr pc133 cas2 crucial mem. It games fairly well. And this Xmas Im giving my celII 800mhz system to my other halfs dad. Should be good for surfing and general use. But its no gaming rig.:D

TomT

12-21-2002, 01:52 AM

They took away some math processor functions to reduce heat. They added cash and bandwith . The tbird and xp where born. The duron is mutch more powerful than a celeron and outperforms all the intel p3s and p4 with 133 mhz buses. Amd would have kept the duron as its main design had it not been for heat. If you want to test this clock your tbird down and test it against a duron. Also thats why an overclocked 1.33 ghz tbird will outperform an 1600 xp they did the same thing when they redisigned the xp. As the chip speeds go up its not due to processor strenght. They actually lower its strenght but up the bus and core speed so it can run faster with less heat. P4s don't have this problem because in each clock cycle they do 2 math calculations to an athlons 4, but really an athlon now does about 3.5 caculations a spin, but spinns faster than say a duron which does a true 4 calculations. Hope I made this clear a computer scientist explained the difference.(he worked for amd). Its hard to translate this when typing.

Giblet Plus!

12-21-2002, 02:35 AM

I don't see my processor spinning yet. Does that mean it's slow?

Giblet Plus!

12-21-2002, 02:36 AM

Originally posted by morpheus kain
How about you box it up and send it to me for Christmas? You know feel the Christmas spirit man!

Nah, my parent's would be without their internet box. Next time I upgrade I'll check in with you. :D

$1500-P4 gamer

12-21-2002, 03:22 AM

"They took away some math processor functions to reduce heat. They added cash and bandwith . The tbird and xp where born. The duron is mutch more powerful than a celeron and outperforms all the intel p3s and p4 with 133 mhz buses. "

Say what. I have had (and still do most) all the chips you mention. I know your wrong for a fact. My p3 smoked my dads Duron mhz per mhz. The xp does aswell and well, the P4 at =mhz with a duron since when even? Is this theoretical, it must be. I say your wrong and can prove it. Wanna dare me. Hehe. The duron was killed of cause they wanted the factorys for making flash mem. htats right for making flash mem cards. And they were right doing so with the xp1600+ selling for $53.00 no sain man would choose a 100fsb dog of a duron over it. LOL :D

OpK Chowdy

12-21-2002, 03:42 AM

I used to game on a 900Mhz Duron Spitfire on a ECS K7SEM with a Geforce2mx 64mb. That thing sucked so much ***. :D

iceblue

12-21-2002, 04:02 AM

.. i could use a geforce2mx.. sure better then my tnt2 :(

Originally posted by OpK Chowdy
I used to game on a 900Mhz Duron Spitfire on a ECS K7SEM with a Geforce2mx 64mb. That thing sucked so much ***.

KODJFEI

12-21-2002, 11:36 AM

I still Game wiht my Celeron 500..... wiht 191 Sdram and gfore2 MX PCI.........:( :mad: I Only play CouterStrike and Warcraft 3 and Maybe Starcraft..... I get only 50 FPS average at 1024x786 on CS.......

But hey i am getitng my new parts for my computer on Christmas soo ... ya....:)

Someone Stupid

12-21-2002, 04:38 PM

I haven't had an AMD processor die on me P4 gamer when overclocked and it would run at 55+ C after intense usage constantly. The P4, it was under a Prometia, meaning it was compression cooled. It didn't even anywhere near that temp.

Just because you have this huge Intel bias (it seems) doesn't mean you shouldn't overlook the facts. I never have seen, nor heard of AMD's just dying like that unless they aren't cooled properly - that Intel was kept VERY cool. They might have the fancy pansy heatspreaders to keep only the very unfortunate from crushing them and a fancy throttle feature, but if they suffer from that much electron migration, it is garbage. I've heard of many Northwood's just dying out, even when properly cooled - hell, I've even seen a whole forum dedicated to it and keeping track of it.

Is it stable at it's factory speed, yes, but the fact that they have this loving tendency to die when overclocked doesn't bid well for their long term lifespan even at factory core speeds. Overclocking just shows the chip is more prone to electron migration than AMD's offerings.

Of course Intel is back to their old ways from the SX and DX days, the B cores all have hyperthreading (as the SX chips had floating point, just disabled), just it's disabled. Just like the SX, DX idea, they are charging you to unlock a feature which is already present. Someone with an odd BIOS on an EPoX board found that out on the 2.53B chip the day before intel released the Hyperthreading 3.06B Northwood. There was an option in his BIOS to enable and disable hyperthreading. Ran test and it showed it was there. Overclockers.com has that article archived off somewhere. If you know the 3.06 release date, go back a week and start looking, you'll find the article. That's like buying a car with an airconditioner, and no controls, but they'll install the controls for double the cost.

---------

Oh, as a side note, actually on the Duron I run at 1280x1024x32 on all but a couple games which I have to drop it down a notch, all at max detail.

causticVapor

12-21-2002, 05:07 PM

Originally posted by $1500-P4 gamer
"They took away some math processor functions to reduce heat. They added cash and bandwith . The tbird and xp where born. The duron is mutch more powerful than a celeron and outperforms all the intel p3s and p4 with 133 mhz buses. "

Say what. I have had (and still do most) all the chips you mention. I know your wrong for a fact. My p3 smoked my dads Duron mhz per mhz. The xp does aswell and well, the P4 at =mhz with a duron since when even? Is this theoretical, it must be. I say your wrong and can prove it. Wanna dare me. Hehe. The duron was killed of cause they wanted the factorys for making flash mem. htats right for making flash mem cards. And they were right doing so with the xp1600+ selling for $53.00 no sain man would choose a 100fsb dog of a duron over it. LOL :D

Dude, you're at it AGAIN. The duron smokes the celII and PIII a mile behind in pure processor performance. Perhaps it doesn't keep up with a PIII in cache performance, but come on now, it only has 64KB. MHz for MHz it offers better throughput. A 1.3 Morgan smokes a 1.3 willy. Did the northwood core run at such a speed it would be exceeded as well. It's called alpha EV6. It's called being athlon-based. Of course you'll get better performance if the CPU has more cache. But, again, MHz for MHz, the duron is more effecient than both CPUs.

Look everywhere, a duron 1.3 can smoke a CelT 1.4 and a PIII 1.3. Perhaps not the S version but you get the pt.

Now one thing you're right on is the ocing of the p4 -- people expect to get HUGE gains from it, and stress the chips. At such high rates, who knows, perhaps intel designated the CPUs as being lower-clocked versions of the same stepping simply because they couldn't be clocked so high without stressing the transistors. Wow... that may be one reason why they cost less. 1.8C steppings are just 2.8s that failed the 2.8 validation test because of transistor quality. Higher voltages? Sure, but a 20-pipeline CPU, combined with the exponential effects on smaller transistor gate lengths, makes voltage increase very risky.

And that's why so many people are having this SNDS BS.

$1500-P4 gamer

12-21-2002, 05:20 PM

Originally posted by Someone Stupid
I haven't had an AMD processor die on me P4 gamer when overclocked and it would run at 55+ C after intense usage constantly. The P4, it was under a Prometia, meaning it was compression cooled. It didn't even anywhere near that temp.

Just because you have this huge Intel bias (it seems) doesn't mean you shouldn't overlook the facts. I never have seen, nor heard of AMD's just dying like that unless they aren't cooled properly - that Intel was kept VERY cool. They might have the fancy pansy heatspreaders to keep only the very unfortunate from crushing them and a fancy throttle feature, but if they suffer from that much electron migration, it is garbage. I've heard of many Northwood's just dying out, even when properly cooled - hell, I've even seen a whole forum dedicated to it and keeping track of it.

Is it stable at it's factory speed, yes, but the fact that they have this loving tendency to die when overclocked doesn't bid well for their long term lifespan even at factory core speeds. Overclocking just shows the chip is more prone to electron migration than AMD's offerings.

Of course Intel is back to their old ways from the SX and DX days, the B cores all have hyperthreading (as the SX chips had floating point, just disabled), just it's disabled. Just like the SX, DX idea, they are charging you to unlock a feature which is already present. Someone with an odd BIOS on an EPoX board found that out on the 2.53B chip the day before intel released the Hyperthreading 3.06B Northwood. There was an option in his BIOS to enable and disable hyperthreading. Ran test and it showed it was there. Overclockers.com has that article archived off somewhere. If you know the 3.06 release date, go back a week and start looking, you'll find the article. That's like buying a car with an airconditioner, and no controls, but they'll install the controls for double the cost.

---------

Oh, as a side note, actually on the Duron I run at 1280x1024x32 on all but a couple games which I have to drop it down a notch, all at max detail.

LOL calling me biased-thats way outta line dude. Also using extreeme cooling isnt considered against warrenty and raising the clock. I thnk you need a reality check man. Secondly only heat kills cpu's. Guess you should be talking to cpu engineers then cause they will highly disagree with ya. Ever hear of electro migration and about 1000 other things that kill cpu's dead!?! How about the fact that no matter how cool you make the cpu on the outside the insides are still gonna be too hot. Thats why P4 uses 20 stage pipeline coolin gcant help that deep in the chip. Sorry you waisted soo much $ just to void warretnys and now feel jipped. Guess you better learn how to oclock right next time and not blaim co's. when you push your luck. AND AMD XP"S DONT OVERCLOCK NEARLY AS HIGH AS P4's. Sheesh.:rolleyes:

$1500-P4 gamer

12-21-2002, 05:42 PM

Originally posted by causticVapor

Dude, you're at it AGAIN. The duron smokes the celII and PIII a mile behind in pure processor performance. Perhaps it doesn't keep up with a PIII in cache performance, but come on now, it only has 64KB. MHz for MHz it offers better throughput. A 1.3 Morgan smokes a 1.3 willy. Did the northwood core run at such a speed it would be exceeded as well. It's called alpha EV6. It's called being athlon-based. Of course you'll get better performance if the CPU has more cache. But, again, MHz for MHz, the duron is more effecient than both CPUs.

Look everywhere, a duron 1.3 can smoke a CelT 1.4 and a PIII 1.3. Perhaps not the S version but you get the pt.

Now one thing you're right on is the ocing of the p4 -- people expect to get HUGE gains from it, and stress the chips. At such high rates, who knows, perhaps intel designated the CPUs as being lower-clocked versions of the same stepping simply because they couldn't be clocked so high without stressing the transistors. Wow... that may be one reason why they cost less. 1.8C steppings are just 2.8s that failed the 2.8 validation test because of transistor quality. Higher voltages? Sure, but a 20-pipeline CPU, combined with the exponential effects on smaller transistor gate lengths, makes voltage increase very risky.

And that's why so many people are having this SNDS BS.

I HAVE A DURON 1Gig. LOL it doesnt hold a candle to the P3 1gig with 133fsb. Not even close games are way faster. Mpeg2 encoding is faster. That huge l1 cache shure isnt showing any advantage except on buisness apps I sure as heck dont use. P3 and XP kicketh the duron's ***. Thats why its P3 against the Tbird. Not the Duron. If the duron was so good then this xp1600+ wouldnt make that 1 giger I have look like dirt would it. And we all know the p4 is less efficient than other cpu's per mhz so lets not rehash old news. This is truely a bold lie right here...
"The duron is mutch more powerful than a celeron and outperforms all the intel p3s and p4 with 133 mhz buses. "
God that is such fud I cant stop laughing. As a matter of fact I cant argue with someone sooo dumb so I'll let it go. Beats "all" the p4's. What rock ya been under LOL.:rolleyes:

TomT

12-21-2002, 06:45 PM

Less powerful would be the right term. Unlike you I like both intel and Amd. The fact stands the duron with the same bus speed and clock speed is the fastest chip. Test your duron with bench marking softeware. Also what im saying is only true from a certain point of perspective. Intel chips do 2 calculations a clock cycle which means (to a point) they have to run almost twice as fast as athlons to outperform them(althlons do 4).. This is really true when you talk about the lower speed athlons, p3s and p4s. Also more work per clock cycle means more friction and heat. Thats why they got ride of the production durons. The fastest spinning chips are intel the most powerful are athlons. Oh almost forgot can you at least be nice. Why do we have to be stupid. The fact is to a point we are all right. Im not trying to fight but facts are facts if you want to pay twice as mutch for a chip go for it. Intel makes a good product but if you buy a Amd you will be able to buy a chip that fits in your old motherboard unlike intel who makes a new socket a year. I like intel but they are very overpriced. thx see you all.

causticVapor

12-21-2002, 09:00 PM

Note, P4-Gamer, that I was talking about architectural performance. :rolleyes:

Did the northwood core run at such a speed it would be exceeded as well. It's called alpha EV6. It's called being athlon-based. Of course you'll get better performance if the CPU has more cache. But, again, MHz for MHz, the duron is more effecient than both CPUs.

I was clearly saying that of course the PIII and P4 will perform better overall, because of L2 cache. The message I intended to convey was that if the PIII and P4 had their L2 cache stripped away, they would be "doggier" than the duron.

"The duron is mutch more powerful than a celeron and outperforms all the intel p3s and p4 with 133 mhz buses. "
God that is such fud I cant stop laughing. As a matter of fact I cant argue with someone sooo dumb so I'll let it go. Beats "all" the p4's. What rock ya been under LOL.

Don't make it look like I said things I didn't say! :mad:

$1500-P4 gamer

12-21-2002, 10:08 PM

"Don't make it look like I said things I didn't say! "

I wasnt, you were defending the staitment that Someone Stupid made.

as for mr.TomT you must have your head up your **** or somthing bud. Cuase I have two amd systems here. So stick it. You kno wi get so tired of this shet right here. Like what tomT just said. Duh you friggen moron I just said I built my dad a duron 1gig have a xp1600+ myself and a 2100+ with nforce2 on the way. I own one **** Intel system. This p4 and I am now Intel bised. Get your head outta the sand. I dont have time for this meaningless bullshet anymore. Laterz -wont miss ya.

:rolleyes:
Put smile with middle fingers up here.:p

benknobi

12-21-2002, 10:57 PM

I have a celery system sitting here, mostly collecting dust. It's a 400/66 w/ a Visiontek Gf2 ti 64MB. 256MB Micron PC133 SDRAM, and a 20G 7200RPM drive using an old HP case, modified to accept a 300w ATX PS, Has an SBlive value in it, and does about 1500 in 3DMark2001. It's using an OEM Asus MB with only 66 and 100 FSB available. No bios options at all. can't get the celery to run at 100fsb :-( ... but it will run all day with passive cooling at 400. I know! I found the CPU fan dead... possibly weeks after it failed... -lol-

My "real" system is an XP2000+ @ 1919mhz and it gets 12,800+ in 3DMark2001

Happy Gaming!!!

Beeblequix

12-21-2002, 11:29 PM

benknobi, check you're email.

please please please guys, I don't want another thread purged.

Let it be known:

1) I've much respect for everyone who has posted. Seriously.
2) I know for a fact that $1500 P4Gamer isn't biased against AMD and is not an Intel fanboy. Read Mr P4G's posts and you'll see he's very objective.
3) trying to dissect the Duron/AthlonPIII/Celery thingy is just conjecture. It's impossible, or at least highly unlikely, that you could 'make' your PIII into a Celery. I know of no method to disable ½ the cache of a PIII to even begin down the comparison cycle per cycle of a PIII Vs Celery. They're not comparable on that level. One has a larger cache and faster FSB because those engineers knew that these areas would make a better proc. Apples and oranges.
4) a cpu will last longer cooled. Even running at stock speeds, eventually it will die, but it won't normally die until it's ventured far beyond its usefulness. I've got Pentium Pro 200's running over here nicely, but I can't imagine using them in another 5 years. We'll be glad to see some of these ol' machine die. I just wouldn't want to be stuck with the comps of today in a few years when there will be a continuance of Moore's Law.
5) have a pastry *delivers doughnuts to all...* :t

Someone Stupid

12-22-2002, 12:42 AM

I never claimed it on warranty (yes, I know that would void the warranty - who here doesn't?), I just went out and replaced it with an AMD system. Yes, I know their are tons of things which effect electron migration. I hadn't even had a huge overclock on it compared to what I could have gotten out of it. I was only a bit over in voltage on a 2.53B and gained about 300 megahertz out of it - I've seen them pushed MUCH further than that on watercooling and a low end tec. I just didn't need anymore speed, and figured when I did, I could just up it then, no use having speed you truly can't use - didn't even last long enough to be upped.

As for the bias claim, I rescind that one, I took it from your name and how you jumped in as your response.

You really do show a whole lot of maturity with the middle finger thing, rather prepubsecent, especially considering it's just a forum. If you take this forum that seriously, I'd hate to see how you react to real world situations.

morpheus kain

12-22-2002, 12:31 PM

Alright P4 bite your tongue and don't say it ok? On the subject, my grandmother has a 900mhz duron and with some garbage onboard video but when I dropped my GF2TI in it and played a bit of Quake3 it worked quite well at 1280X1024 and all the details cranked.

causticVapor

12-22-2002, 03:49 PM

I wasnt, you were defending the staitment that Someone Stupid made.

No defense man, chill. A lot of ppl here made stupid, uneducated statements but most of the stuff you said was right. I was simply correcting what you can't seem to get out of your head and boy do you blow up fast. Well see you all, and thanks for the pastry B. Quix. :t

causticVapor

12-22-2002, 03:53 PM

Originally posted by tony_j15

Actually, I do. It is the one I use for internet(like right now). For gaming, I now have a XP2000+ rig with 256DDR and 60gb HD. Sadly, I am using a TNT2 vid card. It gets a whole 995 3dmarks!:rolleyes: I should get a new vid card after christmas. You could probably consider me as one of the "poor folks" as I am only 16 and it has taken me from april 01 till november 02 for my gaming rig to get finished. I dont have my drivers licence yet, so the only job I had this summer was lawn mowing.

I know how you feel man, I've been a little more fortunate to do web programming and earn quite a bit more -- but at the expense of time, heh, it's a 14-hour workday :eek:

Oh well, I guess I got my reward for all my work, and still room to grow...

Saving up for NV35/college/etc/ect :D

Someone Stupid

12-23-2002, 02:46 AM

I love how the NV35 comes before college in priorities. :)

morpheus kain

12-23-2002, 03:42 AM

Lol screw school!

causticVapor

12-23-2002, 06:27 PM

Originally posted by Someone Stupid
I love how the NV35 comes before college in priorities. :)

Well, err, I was timelining it... :D

morpheus kain

12-23-2002, 10:52 PM

Hehe timeline.... prioritize...... it's all about the gaming man!

causticVapor

12-23-2002, 11:32 PM

Have YOU been consuming too many ethanol solutions?

Giblet Plus!

12-23-2002, 11:47 PM

Hopefully not de-natured ethanol solutions. :p

morpheus kain

12-24-2002, 01:46 AM

Puff The Magic Dragon.....

omendata

12-24-2002, 03:50 AM

Wow - such ranting - we've gone way off topic.

But for a laugh - my main server is running a KT7A Raid - Duron 750 / oC 833 , 256Mb PC'100' Sdram with swoopy new Ati Radeon 7500 and I'm happy to play Unreal Tournament and DoomII at full speed , my Dvix movies run like sheeeeit off a shovel through the tvout - aTI PLAYER IS SUPERB - best ive ever seen.

I am a machine code programmer however so it suits my needs - I would still be happy on a 286 with 512k (and I still have it - VMS Workstation actually) - my how the times have changed. (Cue more raucous laughter)

I remember when I used to work for US Gold back in '84 writing full arcade games in under 32k for the BBC Micro.

Xevious was one of my projects for Taito - Anyone remember that arcade machine - was rather proud of the vertical scrolling routine as I'd never really pushed the 45crtc too far in the past.

Now programmers are so sloppy because they have giggywobbles and meggyhearts to play with - I think its stopped inventiveness and optimization in its tracks - in my time we used self modifying code , optimized machine code loops , data compression to make our code smaller and faster - now it seems to be getting larger and larger - I mean over a meg for a word processor - I remember when you used to fit Lotus 123r3 on a floppy.

The computing world has gone mad , mad , mad........

Days of yore , days of yore

Rant over - hope ye had a few chuckles ...

matt_p

12-24-2002, 04:17 AM

yeah, I qualify as one of the poor teens, I have a old p3 but it actually runs most games very well, the specs are
PIII 550 coppermine
384mb pc100 ram
3d prophet 4500(kyro2)
and sadly a 10gb hdd

this was bought in 99'

Hopefully I'll get my parents into buting a new computer

causticVapor

12-24-2002, 10:22 AM

Originally posted by Giblet Plus!
Hopefully not de-natured ethanol solutions. :p

Well that would explain his absence here for the past few hours.... :D

bubbleflap

12-25-2002, 10:27 AM

Durons and celerons are good for there price, but not good enough for gaming. If you're on a very low budget then by all means get a duron or celeron, but for the price difference to performance ratio between say a duron and an athlon xp the extra money is DEFINITLY worth it.

Have fun! :t

-->Bubbleflap

$1500-P4 gamer

12-25-2002, 02:51 PM

Originally posted by bubbleflap
Durons and celerons are good for there price, but not good enough for gaming. If you're on a very low budget then by all means get a duron or celeron, but for the price difference to performance ratio between say a duron and an athlon xp the extra money is DEFINITLY worth it.

Have fun! :t

-->Bubbleflap
Now, now bubbleflap. Didnt you see the arguement above. I said that too. But popular opinion around here is the duron is more powerfull though per mhz than any P4, P3 or XP ever is or was.:rolleyes: Ohwell dont start it back up again though PLEASE.:t

causticVapor

12-25-2002, 04:33 PM

All he's saying is that XP's are in the price range of celerons, and better, esp. the will celeron. Not that the will celeron is a bad product, it probably has its place as a filler for S478 platforms, as it is THE cheapest thing for S478, but if you don't intend to upgrade to s478, then I'd say go for AMD. Something that costs $30 more than an XP2000+ and has to be Oced to 3GHz to perform like it is not worth it IMO. Esp. with the S OC'd NDS that everybody seems to be suffering from.

IMO Tual cel rocks, better than any s478 cel out there until the s478 cel reaches 2.4GHz......

Someone Stupid

12-25-2002, 07:50 PM

Maybe the Duron is more powerful per megahertz if you just measure it's processing power, and don't take into account it's cache and bus speed. If you take those into account (which would be a real world situation) the Duron is lacking. You can get good gaming performance out of a Duron if you can get it's clock up a bit. Granted an XP is better, but my Duron is in my spare parts system, I see no need to go out and buy an XP when if I want to do some serious gaming I can just go over to the XP platform. The Duron can pull decent fps (@1400) in a decent resolution 1280x1024 at around 30 to 45 fps on most games. The only game it drags on is morrowind, but that is no surprise - as it requires pure CPU power to get it going well.

I wouldn't use the Duron for a gaming platform due to it's memory limitations if I was building from the ground up. I'd use it for office type usage, and what the average adult runs on his or her computer, but nothing else. You really only need the heavy CPU power and memory cache for games and some professional applications.

EDIT: No, I'm not trying to bring the megahertz per megahertz arguement back up, I'm just mentioning where I think he is coming from. I don't know if it's true or not as I don't have a p3 available to test it on. The only computers I have which are older are a 486 and a 386. Not exactly a god comparision there. :)

causticVapor

12-25-2002, 09:05 PM

Yes, those are the difinite areas where the duron is lacking -- and where the Barton will rock.

333FSB initially, 512L2, 400 eventually -- high FSB and large cache, what games like most :D

Of course since the L1 cache is big and exclusive in all K7 CPUs, there won't be that much of a diff :( but I hope it'll be noticeable...

$1500-P4 gamer

12-25-2002, 09:38 PM

But the 166mhz fsb (ie 333mhz) is already out. I want one but just a tid too expensive yet for my tastes. My idea is get a nforce2 mobo and a descent speed cpu like 2100+ and then later go 333fsb. Gotta start with the mobo right.:D

morpheus kain

12-25-2002, 09:54 PM

How about one of u fella's unloading one of your motherboards on me for some spare cash when you get done w/ ur upgrades?

RLT65

12-25-2002, 10:10 PM

I have a duron 850 w/voodoo 3 3000 and my other system has a athlon XP 1800+ and radeon 8500. I play castle wolfenstein and the duron based system is not that slow, I get on average of 50fps using 16bit and it still looks great to me and I am no where near being "poor", just smart. I use my money for other things other than upgrading my PC every 2 months.

RT

causticVapor

12-25-2002, 10:24 PM

Originally posted by $1500-P4 gamer
But the 166mhz fsb (ie 333mhz) is already out. I want one but just a tid too expensive yet for my tastes. My idea is get a nforce2 mobo and a descent speed cpu like 2100+ and then later go 333fsb. Gotta start with the mobo right.:D

Yes, I know. But the barton's not going to be initially @ 400 FSB like everybody thought. It'll be 1833 MHz first, then eventually up to 2.53GHz. Everything from 2.33GHz and up will run on a 400MHz FSB (unofficial as of late). :confused:

If the 333 ones are too expensive, then why didn't you get the 1800 Tbred+? It'll do 1.85GHz easily and 2GHz with a "little" voltage push. :D And it's unlocked by default so you can do 333FSB out of the box.

ED - 1800+ tbred - my bad.