Author: Laurence Chen
Date: 08:57:38 03/20/00
Go up one level in this thread
On March 20, 2000 at 09:25:04, Tom Kerrigan wrote: >On March 20, 2000 at 08:02:55, Laurence Chen wrote: > >>On March 20, 2000 at 00:52:37, Georg Langrath wrote: >> >>>in Aufsess Tournament, Germany many of the programs use Celeron processors. Is >>>celeron processors as good as Pentium for chessprograms? >>> >>>Georg >>Celeron's have a FSB of 66 MHz and on-die cache built-in of 128K, a Pentium 3, >>the Katmai type, has a FSB of 100 MHz and a L2 cache of 512K. A celeron is a >>cheaper version of a Pentium 2, not a Pentium 3. If you were to run all chips > >True. > >>in the same clock speed of 66 MHz, the Pentium 2 is much faster than a Pentium 3 >>at that clock speed. However, this is not true for the new Pentium 3 Coppermine > >False. The PII and Katmai are virtually identical. One is not much faster than >the other. I said at 66 MHZ not at 100 MHz. At 100 MHz, a Pentium 3 is slightly faster than a P2. Also because Katmai is .25 micron, it generates a lot of heat, and it is not very easy to overclock such a chip by using heatsink and fan combo alone. > >>chip. It uses the same on-die cache as the Celeron, however it has 256K of >>Cache, and it is much faster than a Pentium 3,Katmai, in the same FSB. > >Somewhat true. The on-die cache in the CuMine is much better than the on-die >cache in the Celeron. > >>The reason why people buy celeron is OVERCLOCKING, it is very easy to overclock >>a Celeron to a much higher speed than the specs, also Pentium 2, and Coppermine >>are much easier to overclock than a Pentium 3, Katmai. > >False. The PII and Katmai, being virtually identical, overclock equally poorly. >The Celeron and the CuMine overclock well because they do not have external >cache chips that must also be overclocked. > >-Tom
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.