PII vs. Celeron

[DManly]

Well, using winbench98 as a "standard" reference (as long as all the comparison computers use the same benchmark, you can directly compare the results) point, on the CPU (integer, NOT FPU) test my Celeron 300A / Abit BH6 combo @ 450mhz runs at approx 940 or so. A true 450 PII runs at about 1050. As I am somewhat cheap, I would not buy the true 450 PII chip, but I do get somewhat tired of everyone saying that a Celeron @ 450 is as fast as a PII true 450 chip with 512k L2 cache. It's not except in games!

Additional examples; (none overclocked, same cpu integer performance, NOT FPU performance)

A Cyrix MII 333 on a FSB of 100mhz will post just under 700, A Celeron 300A running on a FSB of 66mhz posts about 610. A Cyrix 6X86 200 posts about 435 and a PPro 200 will post approx 500

I always say "about" because the tests will vary sligtly from test to test. I would figure a fudge factor of about 3% +/-

[SIRRICS]

Before you decide on a Celeron or a true PII you may want to view INTELs Website and read what they have to say.

[Maverick]

I've got a PII333 that i can run at 392 without problems and a Celeron 366 at 458.
Which proc. should i use? I think the Celeron. What do you think?

[Roy]

300a for price, P-II 450 for power and performance.

I have the latter, runs fine at 504. Also have Abit BX6 v2.0 on order. Fully expect to see 526.5 and maybe 558. 300a won't go there.

Roy

[Maverick]

does anyone know how big the diff. in performance is between a PII and a Celeron at the same speed.