p4 or celeron

[clipper1971]

Hi can someone please tell me which is the faster/better cpu.

Pentium 4 - 1.8

or

Intel Celeron 2.4

Thanx Clip

[rubberman]

DO NOT get a celeron celery processor

[e404pnf]

the celeron may run faster but its doing it with shorter legs

[guns1inger]

Celeron's are fine for office apps. They are cheaper because they sacrifice cache memory and floating point performance. If you want an office machine for email and word processing, get the celeron. If you want to play 3d games or do video or graphics processing, get the P4

[yoda313]

Celeron's are fine for office apps. They are cheaper because they sacrifice cache memory and floating point performance. If you want an office machine for email and word processing, get the celeron. If you want to play 3d games or do video or graphics processing, get the P4

Hi,

????

I have a celeron D 2.66ghz processor on an Emachine computer. I also have a radeon 9250. I am very happy with gaming and video editing thank you very much

Kevin

(EDIT - with 512mb ram too)

[Poppa_Meth]

The Celeron D series is a lot better than the older celerons. They aren't half bad for light gaming. I'd take one over the older P4s for the most part. I still like Northwood cores better, but Northwood have quite a bit less cache than the Prescott's do. The Celeron Ds are Prescott's and also have more catch in many cases than older P4s.

[rallynavvie]

The only thing the Prescott Celeron Ds have in common with the Prescott P4 is that they're both 90nm process and available in LGA775. The Celeron Ds only have 256kb of L2 cache and a 533 FSB. At least they do now have SSE3 and EM64T available. And given the difference in price:

2.66/533/1MB LGA775 Prescott P4 - $130
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16819116204

2.53/533/256KB LGA775 Prescott Celeron D - $79
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16819112194

For $50 I'd go with the P4 if you do gaming or multimedia work. Otherwise the Celeron D should work just fine for an office-type desktop.

[rubberman]

i thought i read the celeron chips were defected pentium chips or somethng like that.

[jimmalenko]

These two examples are probably roughly the same, but all things being equal, I'd take the P4.


... and @ Yoda:

while you're happy with your celeron 2.66, let me tell you that a P4 2.66 would absolutely eat it - your video encoding times would diminish significantly

[D.A.R.J.R.]

I have a P4 3.2ghz and its 100x faster than my Celeron 1.8ghz.

[yoda313]

Hi,

... and @ Yoda:

while you're happy with your celeron 2.66, let me tell you that a P4 2.66 would absolutely eat it - your video encoding times would diminish significantly

All I'm saying is don't call the celeron crap just because its celeron. I can do all the things I want with it just fine. Sure a true p4 would be stronger but thats not to say a celeron is worthless. That's all I'm getting at

Kevin

[disturbed1]

Encoding, audio and video, depend mostly on cpu speed, not cache. A 3.0 Celeron will encode video faster than a 2.66 P4.

If you use apps that depend on a large cache (3D graphic design and games) the P4 with a higher FSB and larger cache would be the better choice.

The main reason the Intel chips tend to run faster than AMD chip in video encoding is because of the speed the processor is running.

As can be seen in this chart a P4 1.8 is slightly slower than a Cele 2.0, an AMD 2800+ is slightly slower than a 2.2 P4, yet the 2.8 P4 blows the AMD out of the water.

For most apps it is the horse power of the chip, but for video encoding it's down to the pure true speed, in MHZ/GHZ, that makes the difference.

Also, Celerons are not defective P4s. They are designed that way. The actual pin out is completely different than the P4, it is impossible to take a deffective P4 and turn it into a Celeron.

[jimmalenko]

All I'm saying is don't call the celeron crap just because its celeron.

No-one was - all they were saying is that P4s, pound-for-pound, are much better. And in this case, I'm confident the P4 1.8 would outperform the celeron 2.4. If celerons were all you could get, then they'd do the job. But put a P4 on the scene, and it's P4 all the way, baby ...

Sure a true p4 would be stronger but thats not to say a celeron is worthless.

Again, no-one was. They were simply saying that IF you had a choice of a celeron or a P4, that the P4 was a better choice. I believe we told YOU that when you were scoping out your machine, and I also seem to recall that people told you after the fact that you shouldn't have got a celeron ... and unless you've actually had a number of P4s and celerons side by side and actually seen them doing all the same things, then I'd say it's quite hard for you to make a comparison about something you've never had

That's all I'M getting at

[yoda313]

Hi,

That's all I'M getting at

Understood

Kevin

[smearbrick1]

Now... Emachines.... they're worthless!!!!!

Just Kidding Yoda

[jollyjohn]

And some people like Dell....