Pete, let's see if this changes anybody's mind...
Dave Mazza
Christopher Null, PC Computing
August 5, 1999
Quick: What's the best Intel CPU you can buy? If you picked the flashy, zippy Pentium III, you've just been ripped off. Big time. You should've bought a Celeron. If you don't believe me, just check out Intel's Web site (www.intel.com) for benchmarks comparing Celeron, Pentium II, and Pentium III performance. Can't find them? It takes some hunting, but they do exist.
Why hide the figures? Based on Intel's own CPUmark 99 numbers, a 500MHz Celeron scores 36.4 and a 450MHz Pentium II scores 33.5. That pegs the lowly Celeron at 8.7 percent faster than the fastest PII.
What about the Pentium III? A 450MHz PIII ties a 466MHz Celeron on CPUmark. Of course, the 500MHz to 600MHz Pentium IIIs are faster (hitting a score of 44.1), but you'll pay for the luxury.
And how-as of August 2, volume chip prices for the 600MHz Pentium III are $669 apiece. A 450MHz Pentium II is $230, and a 500MHz Celeron is only $167. That means that on a price/performance basis, the Celeron packs about 1.5 times the power per dollar as a PII, and almost 3.5 times that of a Pentium III.
Wait a sec. Intel's best chip is the Celeron, the laughingstock of the computer industry upon its introduction barely a year ago?!
Blame it on the scathing PR fallout from one horribly mismanaged product introduction. The original Celeron, at 300MHz and with no cache at all, was made to be supercheap, but it was a dog when it came to performance. In the ensuing PR nightmare, Intel hastily popped 128K of cache right on the die, and surprise-the Celeron became The Little CPU That Could. The original intent of the Celeron was to take over the low-cost PC market, where it's now doing quite well. But in trying to beat AMD and Cyrix, Intel ended up beating itself.
The latest consequences: It is widely believed, though Intel doesn't acknowledge it, that the Pentium II will be history by year-end. By then, the Pentium III will take on a dramatically new architecture, based on a 0.18-micron production process, running at 600MHz-plus, and with 256K of on-die L2 cache-basically a beefier version of the Celeron.
And the price will be through the roof.
Don't think Intel isn't aware that it goofed. To remedy the situation, Intel is "crippling the Celeron" (according to one unhappy PC maker) with the low-end 810 motherboard chipset, and, starting with the 466MHz version, the Celeron is available only in socket form, not as a cartridge. That means Celeron and Pentium CPUs will no longer fit on the same motherboards, making comparison testing far more difficult.
The rumors are flying. In recent weeks we've heard that the Celeron might not run Windows 2000 (untrue, Microsoft says). And that the 550MHz PIII might be prone to overheating (untrue with the proper heat sink, Intel says). And that the new PIII is severely delayed (untrue, Intel says). Hacker groups continue to publish tricks for taking advantage of the PIII serial number. And Intel's upcoming 64-bit Merced chip appears troubled at best, with large partners edging away from supporting it; this has prompted Intel to open the $250 million Intel 64 Fund, designed to give cash to companies developing hardware and software for the CPU.
And don't forget that AMD's just-released Athlon (née K7) attacks the Pentium III directly. It's enough to make you wash your hands of the Pentium altogether.
Just don't get us started on the Xeon.
-Dave
Michael Elliott (a.k.a. Amberwolf)
>computer industry upon its introduction barely a year ago?!=20
But that was when it had no L2 cache, and it WAS a slow hunk of junk
then. (although it ran cooler than any other cpu--still does, I
think)
>Don't think Intel isn't aware that it goofed. To remedy the situation, =
>Intel is "crippling the Celeron" (according to one unhappy PC maker) =
>with the low-end 810 motherboard chipset, and, starting with the 466MHz =
>version, the Celeron is available only in socket form, not as a =
>cartridge. That means Celeron and Pentium CPUs will no longer fit on the =
>same motherboards, making comparison testing far more difficult.=20
Actually, since there's probably over a dozen Socket370 to Slot1
adapters, most for under $20, that's not true. These have been
available for months.
(This article must be very old)
>The rumors are flying. In recent weeks we've heard that the Celeron =
>might not run Windows 2000 (untrue, Microsoft says).
It runs it just fine. Even in Dual-Processor configurations (which,
by the way, you can't do on the Slot1 versions of Celery's unless you
drill/cut/rewire one--not a problem with the Socket370 versions using
adapters, or the Abit(?) dual 370 board.....)
> And that the 550MHz =
>PIII might be prone to overheating (untrue with the proper heat sink, =
>Intel says)
I'd say that this is possibly true. More than a few of the faster
(500mhz and up) PIII's in commercial machines (such as HP, Compaq,
etc) seem to be doing wierd things that can't be explained by
software problems, and if you replace the CPU, it works for a while
and then the problems reappear, slowly.
Michael Elliott (a.k.a. Amberwolf)
Opporknockity Tunes Studios, Uninked
http://www.mp3.com/Amberwolf
Bruce A. Richardson
The only people that have blown off the Celeron are those that simply can't
imagine that a giant corporation might actually fuck up or even tell
outright lies. That could never happen, right? <g>
I've been overclocking the snot out of a Celeron 300a for over a year
now...24/7, no extra cooling, no nothing. Believe me, if anyone would have
melted down or had problems with such a setup it would be me. I am a
computer abuser since my first Apple II. But, I can't break the Celeron.
It simply runs, fast as hell, and makes me money. Until there's a
compelling reason to choose PIII (and there's not, since the next generation
Celerons will have the PIII instructions), DAW machines based on Celeron
chips will continue to provide higher performance AND lower cost.
The difference in price between a PIII and a FASTER Celeron chip will buy
you a very nice microphone. Now THAT's a difference you can hear.
--
Bruce A. Richardson
Purple Iguana Productions
bandm...@sprynet.com
pete leoni
> The difference in price between a PIII and a FASTER Celeron chip will buy
> you a very nice microphone. Now THAT's a difference you can hear.
Well put Bruce, that's the point I've always tried to make. Try to spend
the money where it will make the most audible difference.
pete
Rip Rowan
--
Rip Rowan
ProRec Editor
http://www.prorec.com
Jim Roseberry
>They're disposable! Besides, they're obsolete after 18 months anyway.
The average CPU stays in my main audio machine for about 6 months.Celeron 300a was a GREAT bargain for me!Like you said... disposable
--
Jim Roseberry
Studio Cat Productions
Studio Cat Software (Audio software/hardware)
1-888-873-8855
www.studiocat.com
j...@studiocat.com
Dan O'Rourke
> Like you said... disposable
> --
> Jim Roseberry
HATE my celeron, had it for almost a year now and can't justify any need
for increased performance. I'll be GLAD when something better comes out!
So's I kin git new some new stuff <G>
Dan
DJobvious
If it wasn't for this newsgroup I wouldn't be running my Celeron 366 at
550. Mixing (and tracking) with my cakewalk/sonorus/tango DAW is cream!
And if it wasn't for this newsgroup, I wouldn't have these tight abs!
(oops wrong testimonial).
-ET
'wish I could say something witty here
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
Dave Mazza
>imagine that a giant corporation might actually fuck up or even tell
>outright lies. That could never happen, right? <g>
Yeah, but the biggest Celeron basher around these NGs doesn't strike me as
someone who would feel that way. But they do seem to be the type who has a
real tough time admitting they might be wrong about something, especially
after shooting their mouth off rather boisterously.
I just wondered what the reaction to that article would be. It's easy for
some to dismiss a person like Pete. But when a mainstream computer mag says
something, it may be more credible.
-Dave
Peter Matuchniak
that often those that are in the know aren't necessarily in the major
magazines. They're busy doing their jobs and constantly learning. we are
fortunate that some also post/read information from these Newsgroups (at
least this one, which seems to have a higher calibre).
I spent time researching a lot of Pete Leoni's and Catena's information and
they seem to come up sound. But when I follow some magazine's approach, I
end up with a broken machine.
I also value Ted's input, because he appears to take a more cautious and
pragmatic (cynical?) view, which is always worth considering too. There is
no one single god in all of this.
Just my two pennies...
_________________________________________________________________
(Tadeusz) PETER Matuchniak -> MiDi-EViL productions
www.mp3.com/variousartist -> pmat...@corsair.com
_________________________________________________________________
Dave Mazza <dav...@bigfoot.com> wrote in message
news:7tdjtd$8fl$1...@hope.harvard.net...
[justin]~~&|======{////}
>I just wondered what the reaction to that article would be. It's easy for
>some to dismiss a person like Pete. But when a mainstream computer mag
says
>something, it may be more credible.
Ziff-Davis makes a living off of people with that perspective on
information... doesn't mean the information is accurate. Magazines =
Advertising, with few exceptions.
--
[justin]~~&|======{////}
http://cyberstude.com
pete leoni
music tech magazines including EQ . I have written about the Celeron in
those forums as well as here. My editors would never get let me get away
with bull manure in those venues. Probably the best music oriented tech
webzine in the world is ProRec. We've got a pretty damn good editor there
too. Rip is a first rate tech-head he knows this computers and audio gear
as well as anyone does, bullshit does not get past him.
Don't underestimate us Cakeheads. ( You too, Dave, I've seen some damn
informative posts that you have written) We know our stuff here <G> And
don't let Ted fool you, he is well aware of that fact. Why do you really
think Ted hangs out here? He's no amateur. He is absorbing all of this. I
am dead certain that he knows we are pioneering this stuff, and you can bet
he reads every word that those of us who are smart/stupid? enough to use
this gear commercially post. While he is gouging and poking fun, you can
bet your sweet ass he is soaking all of this info up for future reference.
pete
Dave Mazza
subjects you aren't knowledgeable on, or sticking to beliefs that are
verifiably wrong, is not.
I would encourage everyone to do their own research, and gather information
from as many sources as they can. But, you have to at least have the smarts
to know when your sources are accurate even if they go against your own
first intincts.
-Dave
Dave Mazza
>information... doesn't mean the information is accurate. Magazines =
>Advertising, with few exceptions.
The important part of the article I cited is that it points out that if you
look in the right place, even though they try to hide it, even Intel
provides the proof that on a price/performance basis, the Celeron is their
best chip, by far.
I'm sure Intel would have been happier if PC Computing hadn't pointed that
out.
-Dave
Ted Perlman
I wish you guys would get your shit straight. I NEVER said a Celeron was
shit, I mostly talked about OVERCLOCKING those Celershits. I was and still
am an ardent opponent to OVERCLOCKING. If a Celeron runs at the speed it
says it's supposed to, then that is not a major problem for me. It's all
that 300A@950 crap that bugs, scares, and annoys the shit out of me.
<they do seem to be the type who has a real tough time admitting they might
be wrong about something>
Substitute "TED" for "THEY".........
I have no problem admitting when I'm wrong. But when across the board all
the audio experts at all the mags, including Craig Anderton and Dennis
Miller, say that Overclocking is NOT safe, which one of us is the fool......
I ain't getting pulled back into this bullshit. Especially when I was and am
right.
Out.
Ted Perlman
Dave Mazza
>music tech magazines including EQ .
Yeah, I know. And I get a lot of great info from some of those mags (Though
I have to say even though it has some good people on staff, I find EQ to be
pretty lame, in general. Sorry.). I also get a lot of great info right
here (and from Pro Rec). In fact, I find this forum to my best source for
computer/DAW tech info. The posts here either provide the information
directly, or point me toward another source of info.
Believe me, I have high regard for many here, and I don't consider their
views second rate. Don't take my comments the wrong way. The important
part of the article I cited was that it pointed out that according to
Intel's own numbers, even at their rated speeds, the Celeron is a better
chip in terms of price vs. performance. Even if someone didn't "overclock"
it, the Celeron is still a better choice for a DAW (or any system).
This whole Celeron overclocking thing (let's call it "performance
maximizing") reminds me of years ago when I used to read VW & Porsche
magazine to learn every little trick on how to get the most performance out
of my VW GTi, cars that are capable of a lot more performance than they have
from the factory (and that most people realize).
While some people take such things too far, there are others who understand
the technology and the limits, and know what can be safely achieved. That's
how it is with the Celeron.
I love this kind of stuff. I've always been a do-it-yourselfer (if I could
get something better by doing it myself), so this kind of stuff is right up
my alley.
-Dave
Dave Mazza
Craig Anderton--gee whiz, finally someone with some credibility! ;)
Dave Mazza
>the audio experts at all the mags, including Craig Anderton and Dennis
>Miller, say that Overclocking is NOT safe, which one of us is the
fool......
Right, but overclocking is running a chip at a higher speed than what it's
designed for. The Celerons that are being "overclocked" are designed to
safely run at the higher speeds. This has all been explained time and time
again.
-Dave
Ted Perlman
He may run it in private, but he publicly advocates NOT overclocking. I look
at ugly women when I'm alone at night, but you won't catch me drooling over
Janet Reno when the sun's out and Dracula's asleep.
....uhhh, that's probably way over some of your heads, so let me put it in
simpler terms.
Don't overclock! You'll fuck up at some point!
But use whatever you want - AMD, Celeron, Cyrix, Pentium, Leonium,
Ath-roseberry, anything.
Fuck it - if you want to overclock, go right the hell ahead. It'll just be
another client walking in my studio asking - "Can you fix this for me?"
Ted Perlman
Ted Perlman
No, dad, it's been ADVOCATED time and time again. Big difference.
My Mercedes is meant to go 140mph on the Autobahn. But do I drive it that
fast? No.
Perhaps I should explain this to you "time and time again".......
Ted Perlman
pete leoni
Craig Anderton's main PC DAW rig is our Overclocked Celeron, ABIT, Maxtor
etc!
Yep you guessed it! He is running our beloved "Newsgroup Computer" as you
put it" He runs Paris, Cakewalk and several other programs on it .
I happen to know that for a fact because he purchased, is using, and
endorsing an O/C Celeron rig that I personally built for him in June.
Same exact specs that we all run here, Celeron 300a Overclocked to 450,
ABIT MOBO, Maxtor drives, all the rest I believe he briefly mentioned he it
in the course of a review in Keyboard or EM last month.
I'm sure he too believes as both you and I do that overclocking is not for
the uninformed, and in some cases is not a good idea.
But the fact is he is happily using an overclocked Celeron. For the record,
outside of this NG, where we have so very many highly skilled computer
people, I do not recommend just anyone overclocking any chip. I do feel
however, that there is nothing wrong in purchasing a complete O/C DAW
however from someone like Jim Roseberry etc. that does know how to do it
properly.
Ted Perlman <ted...@pacbell.net> wrote in article
<7te3k6$a83$1...@hope.harvard.net>...
> <Yeah, but the biggest Celeron basher around these NGs>
>
> I wish you guys would get your shit straight. I NEVER said a Celeron was
> shit, I mostly talked about OVERCLOCKING those Celershits. I was and
still
> am an ardent opponent to OVERCLOCKING. If a Celeron runs at the speed it
> says it's supposed to, then that is not a major problem for me. It's all
> that 300A@950 crap that bugs, scares, and annoys the shit out of me.
>
> <they do seem to be the type who has a real tough time admitting they
might
> be wrong about something>
>
> Substitute "TED" for "THEY".........
>
> I have no problem admitting when I'm wrong. But when across the board all
> the audio experts at all the mags, including Craig Anderton and Dennis
> Miller, say that Overclocking is NOT safe, which one of us is the
fool......
>
pete leoni
(Though
> I have to say even though it has some good people on staff, I find EQ to
be
> pretty lame, in general. Sorry.).
When is the last time you read EQ? It has grown to be one of the best ones
out there. Check it out again.
pete
pete leoni
Look, The reason he is using it is because it works so well. Craig can
afford what ever he wants. I don't publicly advocate it outside of this
N.G.. These are not your average people here.
pete
Kraig Olmstead
is it going to remain a toy? Will we be a Giga Hertz processors within
a year? The harddrives are already fast enough, but still getting
faster. Will BeOS blow the performance curve into the stratosphere?
Sooner or later this stuff is going to be good enough that even the most
ardent cynic will be convinced.
KO
pete leoni wrote:
>
> Hey wait a minute! <sniff sniff>. I *do* write for a couple of mainstream
Amit
i'm just amazed people are still doing the "o/c don't o/c" celeron (or what
ever cpu) dance.
if someone is NOT working with hardware and doesn't know how to follow a
special batch
of proccesers, and doesn't hold the knowledge to build/troubleshoot systems
in component level ....
then he/she should stick to playing guitars and maybe ripping CDs for mp3
convertion.
i have two systems of celeron 300A@450 that work under regular conditions
like 2.0v core and factory crapy heatsink/vant for 18 months in a row.
one system even lost two cpu vents in this time ... got fride.. got a new
vent ... kept working
like new.
in that sense, is bypassing the SMP lock on the celeron and running it in
dual mode has the same verdict
here as o/c??????
i mean hey ... its WAY over ChipZilla's specs .. right???
and it wasn't "ment" to run on SMP boards! <g>
its just like someone is pissing on you and you say its rain cause that's
what he told you .... man!
as long as you o/c and stay in reason boundaries (core specs, erreta, heat..
etc) then its perfectly(!!!) safe.
if you don't know what I'm talking about or find the need to use other
extreme ways to make the CPU/system
stable ......... you might find your self loosing some $$$$ and time
and if "time is money" for you ........ its the risk you'll have to take.
Amit
p.s. there is nothing wrong with ugly women :o) ... well, I haven't seen
this Janet Reno yet!
Dave Mazza
No, the reasons WHY the Celerons may be safely run at higher speeds, and WHY
it technically isn't overclocking (because the chips were designed to run at
those speeds) have, indeed, been explained.
>My Mercedes is meant to go 140mph on the Autobahn.
Right. And it could do that all day, because it was designed to. A Celeron
at the "Intel suggested clock speeds" is a kin to your Merc driving at US
speed limits.
-Dave
Eric Deibler
I'm going to cry! :)
eric
[justin]~~&|======{////}
It's pretty sad when a magazine gets kudos for providing accurate
information, especially when that information is MONTHS late, and totally
obvious... oh well :)
pete leoni
pete
Eric Deibler <edei...@cub.kcnet.org> wrote in article
<37FB61EB...@cub.kcnet.org>...
Donny H. Grace
> These are not your average people here.
Pete,
Are you trying to say that people that hang out here ain't normal? <g>
__________________
Donny H. Grace
GraceFull Productions
Eric Hicks
Eric Hicks
Donny H. Grace <dhg...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:37FB8DA9...@aol.com...
Eric Deibler
eyes!!)
eric
Ted Perlman
I guess that means you won't be posting about recording or music anytime in
the near future, huh?
Ted Perlman
Ted Perlman
Just yell "Here boy!!, come and get it!", and she'll show up.........
<g>
Ted Perlman
Dave Mazza
>
No, the reason WHY certain Celerons can be safely run at higher clock
speeds, and WHY it really isn't overclocking has, indeed, been explained.
Some Celerons were designed to run at 450MHz even though Intel would prefer
you run them at 300, lest they show up their more expensive CPUs.
>My Mercedes is meant to go 140mph on the Autobahn. But do I drive it that
>fast? No.
But it can safely run at that speed for extended periods because it was
designed to do so.
-Dave
Amit
Ted Perlman <ted...@pacbell.net> wrote in message
news:7thetp$n7r$1...@hope.harvard.net...
Dave Mazza
>the near future, huh?
Ooh, good one.