P3 500 or Celeron 500?

OK guys ,need some advice.I'm going to upgrade my celeron 333 to either a P3 500 or a Celeron 500 soon. Is the speed difference between these two cpu's great enough to spend the extra money? Should I get the Celeron and get an extra 64 megs of ram or get the P3 500?

IMHO a celeron-500 w/ 128MB will be faster than a p3-500 w/ 64MB most of the time. when you upgrade: what do you do with the old celery? dump it? if so: try overclocking it first - you might get a celeron-500 with 100MHz FSB for free ... Lio

Hmm, that depends on your current motherboard - if it's a BX motherboard, then either will work, but if not........... The Celerons are made to work with 66MHz front-side-bus (though they generally overclock well on faster motherboards), the P3 with 100MHz (well the 500 is, at least - won't get into Coppermine here). If you have an older (LX) motherboard, then the Celeron is really the only choice. Personally, I have a C400 oc'ed to 450 on an LX motherboard (running at 75MHz). As someone else said, you're probably better off with a C500 and more ram, in any case. Rick

But if you are using Windows 9X, it'll only recognize the first 64MB of ram. I don't know if you will really notice a differencewith 128MB compared to 64MB. Mike > OK guys ,need some advice.I'm going to upgrade my celeron 333 to either a P3 > 500 or a Celeron 500 soon. Is the speed difference between these two cpu's > great enough to spend the extra money? Should I get the Celeron and get an > extra 64 megs of ram or get the P3 500?

64MB. sorry, but this is just plain wrong - win9x will of course recognize and use memory beyond 64MB, I have 320MB and sometimes even that isn't enough (I can record a full GP replay in GPL thou :) to the original poster: IMO get a celeron with the best price (at the moment i'd recommend a 400 overclocked to 450 (75mhz FSB, EVERY celeron can do that easily) - if you can afford to get the 500 you're safe), and as much RAM as you can get. If you don'T have 128 mb then upgrade now! the difference is night and day.

huh?? don't you think you mix something up? like the old TX-chipset that could not cache RAM above 64MB? I am using win98 myself on one machine w/ 128 and another with 256MB ram and it works and uses all ram, believe me ... Lio

Total rubbish. WIN 98 WILL detect AND use Ram over 64 mb. Period. Lars Gaarde On Fri, 28 Jan 2000 11:10:48 -0500, Michael Basden

Quoted text (12 lines)

>But if you are using Windows 9X, it'll only recognize the first 64MB of ram. I >don't know if you will really notice a differencewith 128MB compared to 64MB. >Mike >> OK guys ,need some advice.I'm going to upgrade my celeron 333 to either a P3 >> 500 or a Celeron 500 soon. Is the speed difference between these two cpu's >> great enough to spend the extra money? Should I get the Celeron and get an >> extra 64 megs of ram or get the P3 500?

>Total rubbish. WIN 98 WILL detect AND use Ram over 64 mb. Period. >Lars Gaarde I'll give him the benefit of the doubt and hope that he just misstated what he intended. Of course Win98 will recognize memory up to whatever capacity your motherboard will support (at least for now. There IS a limit, but it's beyond the capabilities of personal motherboards), however there does become a point at which it is no longer beneficial. I'm pretty sure that point is around 128MB. Under some circumstances, you can actually start to slow your system down as you add RAM because it takes too long to sift thru to then go to the cache for its information. IOW, your computer can search thru 128MB for its info MUCH quicker than it can search thru 300MB. And if its information is NOT in that 128MB (or 300MB), when it's done looking, it's got to go thru the cache. I think 256MB is a good hedge for the future since many boards have only 2 or 3 DIMM slots. Gunner

I have a Celeron 300a and have run it at 450 since I bought it. I would think a 300a is a hell of a lot cheaper than a 400. Vintook

Old Intel chipsets (and maybe some others) wouldn't cache memory above 64MB. Machines with >64MB sometimes ran slower than <= 64MB. Win98 can handle 1GB of memory (that's in the MS knowledge base somewhere) -- ----------------------------------------------------------- - Return address invalid - Please share your reply with the newsgroup (reverse the last three letters) -------------------------------------------------------

Voodoo 3-3000 = $140 128MB New Ram = $170 If cost is any object, I choose C500/toys. If $ are plentiful, get both! >OK guys ,need some advice.I'm going to upgrade my celeron 333 to either a P3 >500 or a Celeron 500 soon. Is the speed difference between these two cpu's >great enough to spend the extra money? Should I get the Celeron and get an >extra 64 megs of ram or get the P3 500?

>Old Intel chipsets (and maybe some others) wouldn't cache memory above 64MB. >Machines with >64MB sometimes ran slower than <= 64MB. This is not an issue with Pentium II, Pentium III, or current Celeron processors. The L2 cache cache control logic is on the processor itself, and not a function of the chipset, so it is property of the processor, not the chipset. If you look through some of Intel's technical notes, you'll see that some early steppings of the PII could only cache memory in a 256MB range.

I've seen the P3 500 for as low $230 for the OEM version.Just trying to figure out if it's worth the extra dough.Also has anyone had any trouble those slockets?This cpu will go in a slot 1 board(Abit BH6 w/bios update.)

Quoted text (10 lines)

> Voodoo 3-3000 = $140 > 128MB New Ram = $170 > If cost is any object, I choose C500/toys. If $ are plentiful, get both! > >OK guys ,need some advice.I'm going to upgrade my celeron 333 to either a > P3 > >500 or a Celeron 500 soon. Is the speed difference between these two

cpu's > >great enough to spend the extra money? Should I get the Celeron and get an > >extra 64 megs of ram or get the P3 500?

> Total rubbish. WIN 98 WILL detect AND use Ram over 64 mb. Period. I thought Win95 would also recognise and use more than 64Mb ram (provided you are not on an old motherboard, with a tx, or older chipset). 8-) *Peter* - http://www.cix.co.uk/~peterpc/home.html

Rich Jerome <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:86ukoe$2t7$[email hidden]... > I've seen the P3 500 for as low $230 for the OEM version.Just trying to > figure out if it's worth the extra dough.Also has anyone had any trouble > those slockets?This cpu will go in a slot 1 board(Abit BH6 w/bios update.) > For what it's worth, when I got my PIII 450 I compared the framerates in GPL with a Celeron 300a @ 450 and found the FPS to be exactly the same for the same detail level and number of AI cars. The PIII 450 will o'clock to 558 though. Interestingly, with a V3 3000, increasing the clock speed of the graphics card makes virtually no difference to the framerate, whereas increasing the processor speed from 450 to 558 made a noticeable improvement (with 19 AI cars) - I guess the processor becomes the bottleneck with this much graphics power available? Note: all the above was only tested with GPL (but then, what else matters?)

Well, I'll put in a vote for the PIII. I went from a Celeron 400 OC'ed to 500 to a PIII 500 (now OC'ed to 560) and the difference is really quite remarkable. The PIII internal optimizations really do make a difference (and seem to more than make up for the 1/2 speed cache compared to the Celeron). There's a few things you need to look at before you decide, though. Is your existing memory PC100 memory (for 100Mhz FSB)? If not, you'll have to replace it to use the PIII. If it's PC66 memory, you can probably get away with overclocking it with a Celeron to 75 or 83Mhz FSB. Also note that if you have IDE drives, you may (probably will) have to slow them down to overclock your FSB to 75 or 83Mhz. I have a BH6, and it has limited FSB and AGP/PCI divider options. Again, when I was able to go to a full 100Mhz FSB with the PIII, and re-enable UDMA on my hard drives, the difference was *very* noticable. Also note that at the standard FSB settings, the PIII has a 100Mhz interface with the memory, and the Celeron only 66Mhz. Again a plus for the PIII. It really depends on what your long-term purchase options are. If you have PC100 memory now, and could get another 64mb soon, I'd go for the PIII, without a doubt. If you're willing to go through the OC'ing hassles, and this is the only upgrade you can do for a while, the Celeron might be a good deal. Celeron's appear to be topping out @ 600 Mhz, so you might even be better off getting a pretested 366 or 400 and OC'ing them to 550/600 respectively. That would give you the 100Mhz FSB and allow you to use standard AGP and PCI bus settings. Believe me - messing with your IDE drives to get them working at 75/83Mhz is a bitch (especially since you can kill your data if you push too far)! Just FYI (and I know this isn't a 100% reliable benchmark): 3DMark2000 on my Celeron 500 (400@83Mhz FSB) = 1650 PentiumIII 560 (500@112Mhz FSB) = 2600 This jibes with what I see in games, though. BTW what's your video card? You don't want more CPU than the card can display. I've got a V3-2000 running at 172Mhz (took a heatsink on the back, and fans front and back to do it, though). HTH! Kendt Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ Before you buy.

> I have a Celeron 300a and have run it at 450 since I bought it. I would > think a 300a is a hell of a lot cheaper than a 400. you won't be able to purchase anything below a celeron-400 these days ... unless of course you get a used one ... and who would sell a used celeron-300a that does 450? Lio

I've got the pc100 ram.Not interested in over clocking.Video is a Voodoo 3 3000.

Quoted text (41 lines)

> Well, I'll put in a vote for the PIII. I went from a Celeron 400 OC'ed > to 500 to a PIII 500 (now OC'ed to 560) and the difference is really > quite remarkable. The PIII internal optimizations really do make a > difference (and seem to more than make up for the 1/2 speed cache > compared to the Celeron). > There's a few things you need to look at before you decide, though. Is > your existing memory PC100 memory (for 100Mhz FSB)? If not, you'll > have to replace it to use the PIII. If it's PC66 memory, you can > probably get away with overclocking it with a Celeron to 75 or 83Mhz > FSB. Also note that if you have IDE drives, you may (probably will) > have to slow them down to overclock your FSB to 75 or 83Mhz. I have a > BH6, and it has limited FSB and AGP/PCI divider options. Again, when I > was able to go to a full 100Mhz FSB with the PIII, and re-enable UDMA > on my hard drives, the difference was *very* noticable. Also note that > at the standard FSB settings, the PIII has a 100Mhz interface with the > memory, and the Celeron only 66Mhz. Again a plus for the PIII. > It really depends on what your long-term purchase options are. If you > have PC100 memory now, and could get another 64mb soon, I'd go for the > PIII, without a doubt. If you're willing to go through the OC'ing > hassles, and this is the only upgrade you can do for a while, the > Mhz, so you might even be better off getting a pretested 366 or 400 and > OC'ing them to 550/600 respectively. That would give you the 100Mhz > FSB and allow you to use standard AGP and PCI bus settings. Believe me - > messing with your IDE drives to get them working at 75/83Mhz is a > *** (especially since you can kill your data if you push too far)! > Just FYI (and I know this isn't a 100% reliable benchmark): > This jibes with what I see in games, though. > BTW what's your video card? You don't want more CPU than the card can > display. I've got a V3-2000 running at 172Mhz (took a heatsink on the > back, and fans front and back to do it, though). > HTH! > Kendt > Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ > Before you buy.

My opinion on this is that I would never ever build a machine with less than 128 megs ram for *** nowadays.

Quoted text (49 lines)

> I've got the pc100 ram.Not interested in over clocking.Video is a Voodoo 3 > 3000. > > Well, I'll put in a vote for the PIII. I went from a Celeron 400 OC'ed > > to 500 to a PIII 500 (now OC'ed to 560) and the difference is really > > quite remarkable. The PIII internal optimizations really do make a > > difference (and seem to more than make up for the 1/2 speed cache > > compared to the Celeron). > > There's a few things you need to look at before you decide, though. Is > > your existing memory PC100 memory (for 100Mhz FSB)? If not, you'll > > have to replace it to use the PIII. If it's PC66 memory, you can > > probably get away with overclocking it with a Celeron to 75 or 83Mhz > > FSB. Also note that if you have IDE drives, you may (probably will) > > have to slow them down to overclock your FSB to 75 or 83Mhz. I have a > > BH6, and it has limited FSB and AGP/PCI divider options. Again, when I > > was able to go to a full 100Mhz FSB with the PIII, and re-enable UDMA > > on my hard drives, the difference was *very* noticable. Also note that > > at the standard FSB settings, the PIII has a 100Mhz interface with the > > memory, and the Celeron only 66Mhz. Again a plus for the PIII. > > It really depends on what your long-term purchase options are. If you > > have PC100 memory now, and could get another 64mb soon, I'd go for the > > PIII, without a doubt. If you're willing to go through the OC'ing > > hassles, and this is the only upgrade you can do for a while, the > > Mhz, so you might even be better off getting a pretested 366 or 400 and > > OC'ing them to 550/600 respectively. That would give you the 100Mhz > > FSB and allow you to use standard AGP and PCI bus settings. Believe me - > > messing with your IDE drives to get them working at 75/83Mhz is a > > *** (especially since you can kill your data if you push too far)! > > Just FYI (and I know this isn't a 100% reliable benchmark): > > This jibes with what I see in games, though. > > BTW what's your video card? You don't want more CPU than the card can > > display. I've got a V3-2000 running at 172Mhz (took a heatsink on the > > back, and fans front and back to do it, though). > > HTH! > > Kendt > > Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ > > Before you buy.

I just purchased a new Celeron 366 2 weeks ago for $51. There are plenty out there. As a bonus, it went straight to 550mhz with a GlobalWin heat sink/fan at default voltage. Roger

I agree - I'd only get the PIII if he could get more memory fairly soon. 64mb would be a pain on any recent game. Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ Before you buy.

Where did you get it? Still available? My celeron 300A accept only 450 at 2.2v, what a bad core! board and another fan, and have to risk FSB133 with my a year old BX board and PC100 mem. > I just purchased a new Celeron 366 2 weeks ago for $51. There are plenty out > there. As a bonus, it went straight to 550mhz with a GlobalWin heat sink/fan > at default voltage. > Roger

Wow...I didn't realize that the market for them dried up so quickly. I purchased mine on Jan 15 and there lots of places with them in stock.But here, 2 weeks later, almost no one has them. This, after a quick search, was the only place I found with a decent price. http://www.accessmicro.com/productinfo.php3?ProductId=CPII366CPPGA Hope this helps. Roger > Where did you get it? Still available? > My celeron 300A accept only 450 at 2.2v, what a bad core! attachment > board and another fan, and have to risk FSB133 with my a year old BX board and

Quoted text (7 lines)

> PC100 mem. > > I just purchased a new Celeron 366 2 weeks ago for $51. There are plenty

out > > there. As a bonus, it went straight to 550mhz with a GlobalWin heat sink/fan > > at default voltage. > > Roger