MrT
06-22-1999, 07:06 AM
Had the chance to test a 333 Celeron vs a Pentium II 350. Had some very interesting results.
The Celeron performed very well vs the Pentium II. Considering the Cache difference and the Hype difference, I am considering going up to a 400+Celeron and getting rid of my Pentium II. If you compair the prices with the two the Celeron comes out on top with much cheaper prices. 333 mhz (79$) vs a pentium II 350 (179$). 400 mhz Celeron (130$) vs a pentium II 400/450 (239$+). Benchmarks were done using 3DMark99 Max. and Finall Reality. The Celeron was barely beat. And thats not even over clocked. Just standard speed.
System used to test:
win 98
440Bx Intel MB
STB Velocity 4400 16 video card
128 meg sdram
Celeron 333
Pentium II 350
final results:3D Mark (system is not over clocked and or modified in any way)
Celeron:2900 average test score run several times,
Pentium II:3140 average test score run several times,
Wonder what the Celeron 400+ would do ...hmmm
[This message has been edited by MrT (edited 06-22-99).]
The Celeron performed very well vs the Pentium II. Considering the Cache difference and the Hype difference, I am considering going up to a 400+Celeron and getting rid of my Pentium II. If you compair the prices with the two the Celeron comes out on top with much cheaper prices. 333 mhz (79$) vs a pentium II 350 (179$). 400 mhz Celeron (130$) vs a pentium II 400/450 (239$+). Benchmarks were done using 3DMark99 Max. and Finall Reality. The Celeron was barely beat. And thats not even over clocked. Just standard speed.
System used to test:
win 98
440Bx Intel MB
STB Velocity 4400 16 video card
128 meg sdram
Celeron 333
Pentium II 350
final results:3D Mark (system is not over clocked and or modified in any way)
Celeron:2900 average test score run several times,
Pentium II:3140 average test score run several times,
Wonder what the Celeron 400+ would do ...hmmm
[This message has been edited by MrT (edited 06-22-99).]