Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Celeron, any good ???

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Celeron, any good ???

    i want to upgrade my good old k6-2/400. a pentium III is my favourit but it's too expensive. is a celeron a good alternative? what is a good mobo? overclocking abilities of celerons? minimum power supply?

    please help

    ------------------
    >> Surfwienix <<
    (German)

    My System:

    AMD K6-2/400 non-o/c
    Epox MVP3C-M Super7 (VIA 4.22 + AGP v4.03)
    128MB SDRAM(PC100)
    Matrox Millennium G400 MAX
    (PD 6.0 BETA + TGL 1.3 + DX 7a) AGP2x/256MB @IRQ11(not sharing) non-o/c
    Terratec DMX Sound-System
    6,4GB Maxtor HDD (UDMA33)
    ASUS 50x-CDROM (UDMA33)
    Realtek 8019 Ethernet (ISA)
    Creatix HAM V.90 Modem
    19" Monitor CTX-VL950T (95khz)
    Windows 98SE


    my system:

    AMD XP 2000+
    Abit KTA7 (VIA 4.49)
    512MB SDRAM133
    Matrox Millennium G400 MAX (5.91, AGP 2x)
    Windows XP Prof

  • #3
    Surfwienix, if you have to change motherboard, consider the new AMD Duron. It performs just a little slower than an Athlon Classic and it literally spanks the celery 2. A 700 Mhz Duron is faster than a oc´ed celery 2 (850/100). http://www.anandtech.com/showdoc.html?i=1261&p=1

    Comment


    • #4
      Relocated to the General Hardware forum...
      Core2 Duo E7500 2.93, Asus P5Q Pro Turbo, 4gig 1066 DDR2, 1gig Asus ENGTS250, SB X-Fi Gamer ,WD Caviar Black 1tb, Plextor PX-880SA, Dual Samsung 2494s

      Comment


      • #5
        First of all, I take issue with a lot of people's testing methods out there. If the Duron is a budget chip, why are people comparing it with a celeron when they slap a stick of PC133 CAS2 into that baby and run the memory at 133MHz bus on a KT133? Thats just not fair testing, sinces both chips will be used mainly in midprices to lowend systems. Now slapping in PC100 @ CAS3 and running it at 100MHz bus, now thats a more realistic test.

        As for the Duron being faster, yes it is (due to the 66MHz bus) , but it is still not a better value than the Celeron. Consider these facts:

        Despite claims, the Duron's power consumption is only slightly less than a regular Athlon, and is almost twice that of a celeron. Can you say new powersupply with the Duron?

        Overclocking via FSB on AMD motherboards is still pretty limited (stability-wise) , and right now no motherboard with the ability to change the multiplier are avaliable.

        The best overclock people have been managing with their Duron 700 has been around 770. Even at this speed, the Celeron 566 @ 850 still hands them their hats.

        ------------------
        This Signature Space FOR SALE / RENT



        [This message has been edited by MadCat (edited 20 June 2000).]

        Comment


        • #6
          MadCat: I don´t get your point. People put PC133 ram with duron just because they CAN. It´s meant to be that way. Come on, PC133 isn´t that much expensive than PC100.

          About powersupplies: I am running an Athlon 700 (.18u) with my 235W ps. It has previously ran a Athlon 600 .25u, than consumpted even more power than this 700.

          Both chips are excelent value cpu´s. But my opinion is that duron is a much better buy as it stands. And the celery isn´t just crippled by the fsb. It´s cache is just 4-way associative vs the coppermine 8-way vs thunderbird/duron 16-way. So much for the 256-bit bus.

          Comment


          • #7
            ja, hab ich wohl echt verpasst.

            best mobo for 600mhz celeron ???
            my system:

            AMD XP 2000+
            Abit KTA7 (VIA 4.49)
            512MB SDRAM133
            Matrox Millennium G400 MAX (5.91, AGP 2x)
            Windows XP Prof

            Comment


            • #8
              We can see from the following bencmarks and review how the Celeron hands the Duron it's hat.
              Get real!

              Ace's Hardware
              AMD's Duron: Salvation For Tight Budgets?


              By Johan De Gelas
              Monday, June 19, 2000

              Overclocking, Memory Performance, and Conclusion

              I can imagine that quite a few people might raise the question whether or not the Duron can compete with an overclocked Celeron. Indeed, there is a fair chance that you can get a Celeron 566, which is clocked at 8.5 times 66 MHz, up to 850 (8.5 x 100 MHz). I had to use 1.75v to get the Celeron 566 stable at this high clock-speed. My time was quite limited with this chip, and it remains to be seen if this speed really is rock stable, but there is no denying that the Celeron has a huge overclocking potential.

              Our K7T Pro was a beta board, and would not overclock past 110 MHz. It is likely that the MSI K7T Pro will reach at least the same speeds as its predecessor, the MSI K7Pro, which had no problem reaching 115 MHz FSB. The Duron has quite a bit of overclocking potential as its core voltage is not higher than 1.5V, but until we have boards that "unlock" that potential with a multiplier setting, our Duron 650 was limited to 715 MHz.


              Benchmark Duron 715 Celeron II 850
              Quake 3 Normal 97.6 92.7
              UT 61.5 61
              Content Creation 28.9 29.9
              Povray 33 s 34 s
              MP3 encoding 34.4 s 39.2 s

              Well, the Celeron 850 shows its clock-speed muscle in Content Creation, but that is it. The Duron 715, with its better memory subsystem (FSB at 220 Mhz vs 100 MHz, Memory at 145 Mhz vs 100 MHz) outperforms the 115 MHz faster celeron II in all other tests.

              Understanding the Duron

              So, why does the Duron perform like it does now, and can DDR SDRAM or VCSDRAM boost its performance? Let's find out. The Linpack graph tells more than a thousand words.

              Yes, the Duron outperforms the classic Athlon 650 until the matrix size gets larger than 107 KB. You can also see the results from our AMD Duron 700 test unit, which we will go into more detail over in the future.

              To understand why the Duron performs like this, you got to have a basic understanding of the exclusive cache. Each time a needed piece of data can not be found in L1-cache, the data that is found in the L2-cache (or worse, in main memory) will be written into the L1-cache. The least recently used (LRU) cacheline will not simply be replaced like in a normal cache, but it will be written to the L2-cache. You can understand that all this writing demands extra bandwidth between the L2-cache and the L1-cache. Both the Athlon 650 and the Duron have a 64-bit pipe from the L2-cache to the L1-cache, but the Duron's cache is clocked twice as high. Therefore, the Duron's cache has twice the bandwidth of the Athlon 650, 5.2 GB/s (8 bytes x 650 MHz) versus 2.6 GB/s (8 bytes x 325 MHz). As we have learned, the exclusive nature of the Duron's cache will eat quite a bit of that bandwidth advantage. The maximum amount of data or instructions that the Duron can store on the die is less than 128 KB. Because the data cache is 64 kb and it is very unlikely that the whole L2-cache will be used for data or instructions. That is why you see the Athlon 650 outperform the Duron once the matrix size gets past 107 KB.

              Most popular applications have a memory footprint (amount of repetitively used data and instructions) which is more or less 256 KB to 512 KB in size, as we can clearly see that the Coppermine 600 outperforms the Katmai and the Thunderbird outperforms the Athlon in almost every test. This is why the Duron cannot outperform its older brother in most benches.

              The small cache also means that the Duron is very sensitive to the memory subsytem. Watch this:


              Benchmark Duron 650 with 100 MHZ SDRAM Duron 650 with 133 MHZ SDRAM Duron 650 133MHZ VCC SDRAM
              Quake 3 Normal 82.1 86.7 89.3
              Quake 3 HQ 81.3 82.9 85.1
              Expendable 64.6 69.8 69.9
              MCAD 150 17.63 20.68 20.53
              CPUMark 55.2 57.9 57.9

              Oh! This is really surprising! The VIA KT133 is better optimized for the VCSDRAM! VCSDRAM (Virtual Channel SDRAM) provides no less than a 3% boost to the Quake 3 scores. The 100 MHz scores reveal the achilles heel of the impressive Duron. You can use your old PC66 or PC100 SDRAM, but you will lose a lot of performance.

              Final Evaluation

              Without any exaggeration, the Duron offers an earth shattering price/performance ratio! Its Arch-enemy, the Intel Celeron, is too crippled by its 66 MHz bus, and must throw in the towel at standard clock speeds. The Celeron has a better overclocking potential for now and comes closer to the Duron at overclocked speeds, but even at lower clock-speeds, the Duron leads in most benchmarks. No other chip benefits so much from better memory technology. With DDR SDRAM and other faster memory technologies around corner, the Duron has a bright future ahead. And let us not forget that the Duron has more than enough frequency headroom, so future Socket A motherboards might offer an greater overclocking potential.

              If you have super 7 system and you like to play games, then the Duron offers remarkable performance (up to 250%!) gains, even though you have to invest in a new motherboard.

              We appreciate that AMD offers a very strong CPU to the low budget market, but nevertheless we hope that socket A may live longer than Slot A. While the Slot A processors still offer excellent performance, we feel that AMD should offer a better upgrade path to all the owners of the Slot A motherboards.

              Special thanks to Drew Prairie and Patrick Brouckaert of AMD for their quick support in this review and in the past. Mina Hsu and especially Angelique Berden of MSI also rank among our heros for helping to supply Ace's Hardware with elusive K7T Pro engineering samples. Finally, thanks the PC Magazine Belgium crew (Thomas, David, and Kevin




              Comment


              • #9
                Yes, I have to admit the Duron is a better performer...but then, you need to make certain the motherboard you purchase can manipulate the multiplier and voltage.

                ------------------
                This Signature Space FOR SALE / RENT

                Comment


                • #10
                  At best with the benchmarking done at Anand it is clearly visable that the Celeron2 overclocked to 100MHz FSB on a BX board does out do the Duron and its 133MHz. The Celeron cant beat the Duron if its being OC on a Via chipset board but hey BX is better!
                  So when taking all this and availability and price and old technology (BX Boards) into consideration the Duron isnt even close in my opinion!

                  Cheers!

                  Comment

                  Working...
                  X