Performance of Celeron M Processors

Message

sparta.rising · #1 Post by **sparta.rising** » Sat Aug 30, 2008 3:59 pm

So I just picked up a number of R51's with Celeron M processors (they were super cheap). I know just about nothing about Celeron M, except that its the budget slow Intel processor. How does it stack up against the Pentium M? How does it stack up against the P4m? I know the old approximation that a Pentium M 1GHz = Pentium 4M 1.6GHz, how does that compare with the Celeron M?

All the machines have Celeron M 1.3GHz CPUs. I should be able to replace any of the Celeron M CPU's with any Dothan CPU, right?

ajkula66 · #2 Post by **ajkula66** » Sat Aug 30, 2008 7:00 pm

They're not really fast and they're quite warm, that's about it.

Even if you were to replace them with cheap Banias CPUs that are dime a dozen nowadays, you'd be better off. There are some compatibility issues

Personally, I prefer a solid P4M over Celeron M, but many would disagree...

Hope this helps.

sparta.rising · #3 Post by **sparta.rising** » Sat Aug 30, 2008 7:50 pm

What are the compatibility issues? I'm guessing I can only use Dothans with 400MHz bus.

#4 Post by **Harryc** » Sat Aug 30, 2008 7:53 pm

I have a cheap Pentium M 1.6 Banias for sale in the Marketplace forum if you are looking for them.

ajkula66 · #5 Post by **ajkula66** » Sat Aug 30, 2008 7:54 pm

The person to ask would be underclocker, since he's done quite a few of these conversions in the past, but I remember reading about people installing PM CPUs and getting odd speeds...

I apologize for not being able to be more specific, this is really not my area of expertise...

#6 Post by **underclocker** » Sat Aug 30, 2008 8:06 pm

You rang?

The R51's with Celeron CPU's all used the same motherboards as their Pentium M counterparts. Therefore you can swap in pretty much any 400MHz bus Banias or Dothan Pentium M as you like. That includes the 725A, 735A and 745A Pentium M 's, since all the Celeron models had Intel GPU's and BIOS that supports pretty much all the Pentium 400MHz bus CPUs. This is not the case with the ATI GPU R51's that used the same BIOS as T40/T41/T42's.

A bonus is you won't have to worry about loose GPU's.

Getting back to the original question, Celeron CPU's aren't too bad, but as George wrote, for pretty much $10 you can drop in a Pentium M 1.6GHz CPU. Depending upon the model, the Celeron CPU's had 1/2 the processor cache and did not have SpeedStep. Therefore, they were only slightly less powerful than a similarly clocked Pentium M, but got wose battery life and always ran warmer. Overall, though, they are fine CPU's, but for $10...

All that being said, what I wrote is absolutely not the blanket case with R50's, R50e's, R51e's or any R52's. Those models are much trickier to decipher as to what you can do with regard to upgrades. You'd have to really study the HMM's and TABOOKS to figure out where to go with those.

Bottom line, the R51's with Intel GPU's at a good price are about the best buy going today. I used a motherboard from one to fix my T41 with a failed ATI GPU. I'm typing this on it now.

Enjoy and consider selling some to forum members, they'd probably love to use them as is or tear them apart.

#7 Post by **Harryc** » Sat Aug 30, 2008 8:27 pm

This is off topic, so please excuse this minor hijacking... but Ed, you wouldn't happen to know off the top of your head if any of the Intel/Celeron R51's came with Flexview LCD's? Please don't look it up if you don't know...I'll do the homework. Thanks.

aaa · #8 Post by **aaa** » Sat Aug 30, 2008 8:38 pm

sparta.rising wrote:So I just picked up a number of R51's with Celeron M processors (they were super cheap). I know just about nothing about Celeron M, except that its the budget slow Intel processor. How does it stack up against the Pentium M? How does it stack up against the P4m? I know the old approximation that a Pentium M 1GHz = Pentium 4M 1.6GHz, how does that compare with the Celeron M?

All the machines have Celeron M 1.3GHz CPUs. I should be able to replace any of the Celeron M CPU's with any Dothan CPU, right?

The Celeron M is not slow. It's performance is very close to the PM. It's the older Celerons (scaled down P4s) that were horribly slow.

They run hotter than the Pentiums though.

#9 Post by **underclocker** » Sat Aug 30, 2008 8:38 pm

I'd say no way, since I do not think the R51's with Intel GPU's support resolutions greater than XGA or 1024x768. And FlexViews are minimally SXGA+ or 1400x1050.

#10 Post by **Harryc** » Sat Aug 30, 2008 8:46 pm

That makes sense, thanks.

sparta.rising · #11 Post by **sparta.rising** » Sat Aug 30, 2008 9:23 pm

Harryc,
I saw the listing, I'll probably be interested once I get all of the machines up and running!

dr_st · #12 Post by **dr_st** » Sun Aug 31, 2008 10:47 am

The reason you won't find a Celeron-M and a Flexview LCD in the same system is because high-end components are generally not matched with low-end components on Thinkpads, but not because the integrated Intel graphics do not support anything over XGA. Even the lowliest 10-year old graphics cards should support UXGA with no problems. At best, support is crippled in the driver, which usually can be worked around.

aaa · #13 Post by **aaa** » Mon Sep 01, 2008 5:11 pm

dr_st wrote:The reason you won't find a Celeron-M and a Flexview LCD in the same system is because high-end components are generally not matched with low-end components on Thinkpads, but not because the integrated Intel graphics do not support anything over XGA. Even the lowliest 10-year old graphics cards should support UXGA with no problems. At best, support is crippled in the driver, which usually can be worked around.

Firsthand experience says otherwise. For some reason the 855 in Thinkpads doesn't like SXGA, even though Intel says it should work.

Performance of Celeron M Processors

Performance of Celeron M Processors

Re: Performance of Celeron M Processors

Who is online