CPU Upgrade PIII 500 MHz or Celeron 600 MHz

Message

harald612 · #1 Post by **harald612** » Mon Jul 03, 2006 11:19 am

I have a ThinkPad 600E upgraded to Pentium III with 650 MHz SS, running at 500 MHz. As I know, the Celeron 600 MHz has no Speedstep, so it should run at 600 MHz. But is it faster than a Pentium III, because of lower L2 cache 128 KB ?

Thanks
Harald

JHEM · #2 Post by **JHEM** » Mon Jul 03, 2006 11:55 am

Keep the PIII!

Regards,

James

mattyprice4004 · #3 Post by **mattyprice4004** » Mon Jul 17, 2006 5:48 pm

I would say keep the PIII, as the cache would easily make up for the speed difference!

serverbook · #4 Post by **serverbook** » Wed Jul 26, 2006 10:33 am

128 l2 xtra cache only 1-8% with in rich multimedia
And 1-2 % elsewhere mghz for mghz
celeron with raw 20% faster clock cycles is the way to go!
You will not be dissapointed.we know p4 nothwoods with 512 cache outperform p4 presscotts with 1 mb l2 (run alot damm cooler too) cache isn't everything
Compared to decent ram and hdd mods(as long as the cpu does the job its designed to you will have no woories
Celerons are beaut because they run cooler,use less battery and don't mess up like dumb speedstep cpus that are know to have prominent slow speed issues between switching in xp pro and have caused many a headache for notebook user being stuck on low speeds thats why celeron notebooks are consistently faster in the longterm.
Don't be surpised if it performs faster then a pentium 4
Trapped in low speed mode.

Good try intel
But fool i am not

MODERATOR EDIT: Changed case to avoid "yelling" in all caps.

Ken Edmonds · #5 Post by **Ken Edmonds** » Fri Aug 25, 2006 5:19 pm

Celerons are absolute cr@p, certainly in that era. Newer ones may be better.

In desperation after a hard drive failure a few years back, I cobbled together a PC from bits I had laying around using a 533MHz Celeron. I thought it wasn't very good and little faster than the failed AMD K6-2/200, but at least it worked

Shortly afterwards I managed to acquire a PIII 500 which I promptly fitted. According to Norton's speed test, the PIII, although nominally slightly slower, was 2.1/2 times faster.

No contest.

pianowizard · #6 Post by **pianowizard** » Fri Aug 25, 2006 5:27 pm

Ken Edmonds wrote:Celerons are absolute cr@p, certainly in that era. Newer ones may be better.

Yeah, I read that the Celeron D is pretty good.

ndoggfromhell · #7 Post by **ndoggfromhell** » Sat Aug 26, 2006 9:00 am

I can actually do this test... cause I have two 770's right now with the same configs as you are questioning. There shouldn't be much, if any, difference since the 770 and the 600 are pretty close relatives. The only factor would be the onboard 32meg of ram, but i'm sure you've disabled that in your 600 and are running 512meg of pc100.

Do you have any benchmark of choice?

cmarti · #8 Post by **cmarti** » Sat Aug 26, 2006 1:14 pm

From i been reading everywhere pentium III always outperform the celerons. But celerons are better for overcloking.

I always try to get the best that's why i choose pentium instead of celerons.

CPU Upgrade PIII 500 MHz or Celeron 600 MHz

CPU Upgrade PIII 500 MHz or Celeron 600 MHz

Who is online