600 and 733 CPU

[Dputiger]

The truth is, there's really no reason to buy a 1 gigahertz or 800 Mhz machine TODAY if your a casual user/hardcore gamer.

Intense application users typically either run dual systems or do, in fact, need the high-end performance, but I promise you that you'll still get a nice frame rate out of Quake III on a Pentium III 600 or an original Athlon.

[atari2000x]

Example: 100mhz upgraded to 200mhz = 100% increase | 500mhz upgraded to 1gz = 100% increase | 500mhz upgraded to 600mhz = 20% increase, because performance is up only 100mhz... not a big boost at all

[jpeppers]

Can one notice the difference between a 600 and a 733 CPU?

[Warthog]

Probably not really.

I asked the same question about a 800mhz and a 1ghz. People here said the same thing. Only in super high intensity stuff would that make some sort of difference. RAM is the major speed booster.

Your comp would just *sound* better with the higher number. http://sysopt.earthweb.com/forum/smile.gif

Warthog

[NDC]

I agree with Dputiger & Warthog. You won't notice a difference to the point where you will says, "****! This 133Mhz more makes a BIG Difference!" http://sysopt.earthweb.com/forum/smile.gif But as for RAW power, yes, you will notice SOME difference in intensive applications.

It seems that CPU seems to be going faster and faster, BUT... most of the devices that are connecting to that CPU just isn't getting as fast.




[This message has been edited by NDC (edited 09-02-2000).]

[BBA]

If you run games, you will notice a difference. If you are bumping speed by bumping FSB, you will notice overall differences because your whole system is bumped up by faster signals to everything.

It's all a matter of what you run and how you run it as to whether you will see a difference.

[NDC]

I'm not very familiar with running games, I'm not much of a gamer but isn't there a limit to how fast a game a certain game can run? For example, if I was to run Quake 3 on a Pentium 1Ghz, would it run better than a Pentium 800Mhz? I mean if you were comparing a game that required a CPU of 333Mz and you ran the game on a Pentium 233, I would understand. http://sysopt.earthweb.com/forum/smile.gif

[This message has been edited by NDC (edited 09-02-2000).]

[Brangwen]

I agree with the [paraphrase] "600 PIII gets the job done on most applications we use vs anything higher, i.e., 800 or 1 GHz." I run a 600 and when I kick up to 720/800, no huge deal, frankly. I think it's psychological if anything excepting for some real "heavy" programs that are really designed to require a gig of Hz. And I agree with the observation that most of the systems we use don't have integrated peripherals that are designed to keep up with the high end cpu's. I would add that "perhaps" ultra high speed drives make the most noticable difference in overall performance, more ram notwithstanding.


Brangwen http://sysopt.earthweb.com/forum/wink.gif

[NDC]

Thank you for your reply Brangwen. http://sysopt.earthweb.com/forum/smile.gif That was what I thought also, just had to check other opinions. http://sysopt.earthweb.com/forum/smile.gif

[Richard_Cranium72]

To whom is what a speed increase??

Check the system monitor for CPU % when doing tasks.
Kernet Processor Usage is the one, it's usually in light Blue.

Change chart speed to 1-second.

Run items you do normally, like a scanner, printer, System File Checker, DeFrag, etc.

When printing, or DeFragging my HP 333mhz 66mhz fsb processor is pegged out at 100%, so I could use a faster cpu, fsb, memory etc.

I o/c it to a blazing 366mhz w/75mhz fsb and DeFrag dropped to 65% avg cpu usage.

To finally answer one question, yes increases in processor ability has advantages in some areas not all though.

At Intel's site there is a comparison between the 733 and 800mhz cpu's.

In most tests the 800 is faster, but some others like four or so the 733 did a better job.
I don't understand all I know about them Dhrystones, Millions of triangles per seconds, flintstones and all the other rubbish.. j/k

[brandon184]

If your thinking about preformance, go with the 733.

If your worried about a budget, go with the 600. There won't be a noticable difference.

- Brandon

[Snuffy!]

I've got a celeron 600, and I run it at 800, and I notice a big difference in Quake3, plus, in 3DMARK 2000, when my cpu was at 600, I scored 2339, but when I was at 800, I scored 3189. Now thats a big difference.

[jpeppers]

Read this and tell me what you think?
http://sysopt.earthweb.com/forum/Forum2/HTML/009445.html

[brandon184]

A PIII and a Celeron are different preformers. http://sysopt.earthweb.com/forum/smile.gif