I am back...... The Celeron has been burnt in and it is a big dissappointment. It seems I was not keeping up with the Intel news letters fully otherwise I would have noticed a revision was made on all Celerons 2.4gig and beyond. So this 2.6gig cpu will not overclock beyon 3.3gig with out stability issues. The real problem is heat, at 3gig at idle the temps are around 90 degrees at 3.3gig the temps at idle are 105 degrees, if I up the voltage for increased stability the temps jump as well, also of note the 3dmark scores for the 2.6gig cpu clocked to 3.1gig are 1000 points higher than the 2gig Celeron at the same speed of 3.1gig.... I have looked at mini fridge water cooler set ups in a real way.. All that this has accomplished is the creation of a new highend back up data storage system... This weekend I begin the new build an Asus P4P 800 and the 2.4c Intel , and I lean towards the ATI 9600 pro, which I will install onto the Celeron system long enough to run a few benchies...lol..... I would have posted a link to the futuremark scores, however due to a detected cpu speed variation futuremark will not allow me to publish the scores, I have sent them emails and recieved no responce.
Foaming gibberish , AMD fanboyz "IN GENERAL" place way to much faith in benchmarks or review sites that tout the AMD line-up. Now all of this talk about real world benchmarks, does not mean alot if its based upon content creation, when you open a folder that has over a gig worth of jpg thumbs and it loads instantly just how much faster can an AMD cpu do that ??? When your system is online just how much faster can you go from page to page, just how fast can you burn a cd, this Celeron can do it in less then five minutes. The futuremark test is weighted in areas more so than in others, if you worry so much about price and preformance then how do you justify spending an extra $80 dollors for the P4 Northwood with 128k more cache memory, the benchmarks are almost identical. Hey have you read the Intel articles about the Presscot Celerons, they support 800mhz of FSB and they overclock, and they will be here soon enough, for my own use the Intel platfrom is the best, its what I work with in a most effective manner. So when the next generation Celeron arrives and pushes more AMD benchmarks farther down into the data base dungeon , I will still be here spouting my foaming gibberish...........lol..............
ooooooo I want to join this war, I'm siding with Intel on this one, they have an been good to me and I could always depend on them, but this is how it goes, AMD is a good chip don't get me wrong, and it is a tweakers processor, however if you don't want to tweak as much, Intel is the way to go. Think of it this way, if AMD didn't make good processors how could they have reached where they are today, same with Intel.
I remember watching a video at toms hardware.com...it was about what happens when you take the cooling off of an AMD chip..and an Intel Chip..they did it to a couple different setups...after watching the video I promised myself I'd never buy AMD again...intel is worth the extra $$$...if you can find the video I'd watch it..it might change your mind too.
The moral of the story there being, double check your work before you fire up a newly built system. Any decent builder should live by those rules anyhows, it dont make AMD's any worse a chip and IMO doesnt justify the price gap between most AMD and Intel products. Plus its a non-issue now with boards such as the nforce 2 based systems having their own thermal protection measures.
Mind you all, ignorance doesnt imply its a bad thing, its simply things you guys dont know, its understandable with technology.
Ok, first off Tcom.
The P4 has 256k more cache, makes a big difference in its arcitechture. Its alrdy on the 800bus. And you cant leave out HT. Which was an excellent way of increasing the processor's efficiency.
All this combines to make the top end P4 beyond the reach of AMD. Which no amd "fanboy" that ive talked to is in denial of. But it also makes it the hottest running desktop cpu dissipating about 86watts, while amd is at about 82watts (bigger difference then you think). Hmm....so much for that heat "issue" with AMD.
And benchmarks in general have come under heavy fire lately. And by everyone "in general". And why are you saying that "fanboyz" put too much faith in benchmarks, while you, at the exact same time are touting your 3dmark scores?? Thats what is referred to as "hypocrisy", making you a "hypocrit"
And the processor speed HAS NO EFFECT ON HOW FAST YOU BURN A CD. Thats what the numbers on the cd-burner are for.
Websurfing again, is not cpu limited.
And yes, i can open folders with an AMD chip instantly no matter how much **** is in it.
Ok, now Yoshi.
The Athlon made AMD big by 1) Being faster then the Pentium 2) Being cheaper then the Pentium 3) More easily overclocked because you could unlike the multiplier, unlike the Pentium
And to this day, AMD are still numbers 1 and 2 in the mid/low end range of processors today. Now both families have their sweet spots with overclocking.
Now dreamwalker,
As ive alrdy mentioned, Intel currently has the hottest running cpu. And AMD has since then improved thermal protection. Which if you read the article along with that video, it says just that.
No. The P4 williamette has 256k L2 cache 8k L1
P4 Northwood has 512k L2 cache 8k L1
Tbred- and palo XP's 256k L2 cache 128k L1 cache
Barton has 512 L2 cache 128k L1 cache
So the barton is superior to the Northy in the cache chips. It has TONS more L1 which is why the higher ALU on any amd cpu compaired to P4. The L2 is = but then SSE2 is P4's savior. Look at raw fpu on any P4 and compair to AMd Xp's. Its usually x2 faster than P4. But sse2 saves the day. P4 running 8k L1 always seemed crippled to me. Why? Its cheaper to make with less L1, no doubt it would make a stronger ALU integer cpu. Not saying the P4 isnt strong mind you. Anyhow those are the specs. The p4's big difference is the 20stage pipeline. Thats what makes it bandwidth hungry. The stages in pipeline get data startved and your performance goes wway down. So P4 HAS to have a higher mem bandwidth than XP or P3. Its absolutly necesary.
I must admit though, i wasnt exactly bowled over by the performance gains of the extra L2 cache on the Barton's, still, theyre very good CPU's none the less, but wasnt the L1 cache kept the same size instead of being increased in accordance with the L2?
Originally posted by Yoshi ooooooo I want to join this war, I'm siding with Intel on this one, they have an been good to me and I could always depend on them, but this is how it goes, AMD is a good chip don't get me wrong, and it is a tweakers processor, however if you don't want to tweak as much, Intel is the way to go. Think of it this way, if AMD didn't make good processors how could they have reached where they are today, same with Intel.
Yoshi
You're right. A lot of tweaking is needed for AMD based systems. Here's what I did with my last AMD based build.
1. Buy the parts
2. Put them together
3. Installed WinXP
4. Installed Drivers for video and sound (the rest was automatic with XP install)
5. Used my PC
With intel you don't have to do all of those mundane tasks. Windows is already built into the CPU and so are all of the drivers. There's just too much tweaking involved with Athlon systems.
Originally posted by Dreamwalker I remember watching a video at toms hardware.com...it was about what happens when you take the cooling off of an AMD chip..and an Intel Chip..they did it to a couple different setups...after watching the video I promised myself I'd never buy AMD again...intel is worth the extra $$$...if you can find the video I'd watch it..it might change your mind too.
The moral of the TH article should be "If you're stupid enough to take your CPU cooler off while your computer is on, you shouldn't have a computer."
What next, will you refuse to buy (insert car maker here)'s car because it will crash if the tires fall off while driving down the freeway? Or what if you ripped the radiator out while doing 70? I'm sure it will burn up.
Basically, that was perhaps the most useless article he's ever thrown up. Considering the source, that's saying a lot.
Have any of the AMD fanz looked at the company loss posted by Advanced Micro, anyone can sell computer hardware for a loss, there is a very good article at overclockers.com about how the next generation of AMD cpuz must sell for a large profit or the company will become a division of IBM, at which time the prices on all AMD products goes up and stays there. So this summer you can buy a good AMD based system on the cheap, by next summer the prices on all of the product line will increase. Now even if they buy a little time with chapter 11 reorganization no judge will allow them to make products and then sell them for a losss .....
You're right. A lot of tweaking is needed for AMD based systems. Here's what I did with my last AMD based build.
1. Buy the parts
2. Put them together
3. Installed WinXP
4. Installed Drivers for video and sound (the rest was automatic with XP install)
5. Used my PC
With intel you don't have to do all of those mundane tasks. Windows is already built into the CPU and so are all of the drivers. There's just too much tweaking involved with Athlon systems.
Huh? You need to get out more man. Intel systems require just as much tweaking, if not more (esp in ocing) because of the asynch memory dividers.
An athlon-based system need not be tweaked, either; default normals always work and they require no more "drivers" than the intel ones do.
I am back...... The Celeron has been burnt in and it is a big dissappointment. It seems I was not keeping up with the Intel news letters fully otherwise I would have noticed a revision was made on all Celerons 2.4gig and beyond. So this 2.6gig cpu will not overclock beyon 3.3gig with out stability issues. The real problem is heat, at 3gig at idle the temps are around 90 degrees at 3.3gig the temps at idle are 105 degrees, if I up the voltage for increased stability the temps jump as well, also of note the 3dmark scores for the 2.6gig cpu clocked to 3.1gig are 1000 points higher than the 2gig Celeron at the same speed of 3.1gig.... I have looked at mini fridge water cooler set ups in a real way.. All that this has accomplished is the creation of a new highend back up data storage system... This weekend I begin the new build an Asus P4P 800 and the 2.4c Intel , and I lean towards the ATI 9600 pro, which I will install onto the Celeron system long enough to run a few benchies...lol.....
I would have posted a link to the futuremark scores, however due to a detected cpu speed variation futuremark will not allow me to publish the scores, I have sent them emails and recieved no responce.
Reply With Quote
Foaming gibberish , AMD fanboyz "IN GENERAL" place way to much faith in benchmarks or review sites that tout the AMD line-up. Now all of this talk about real world benchmarks, does not mean alot if its based upon content creation, when you open a folder that has over a gig worth of jpg thumbs and it loads instantly just how much faster can an AMD cpu do that ??? When your system is online just how much faster can you go from page to page, just how fast can you burn a cd, this Celeron can do it in less then five minutes. The futuremark test is weighted in areas more so than in others, if you worry so much about price and preformance then how do you justify spending an extra $80 dollors for the P4 Northwood with 128k more cache memory, the benchmarks are almost identical. 
Hey have you read the Intel articles about the Presscot Celerons, they support 800mhz of FSB and they overclock, and they will be here soon enough, for my own use the Intel platfrom is the best, its what I work with in a most effective manner. So when the next generation Celeron arrives and pushes more AMD benchmarks farther down into the data base dungeon , I will still be here spouting my foaming gibberish...........lol..............
