Checking out Celeron II 800, but only good for 100fsb??? that can't be right?can it?

[Carmine_Paterno]

I need a better chip to o/c for my ASUS P3V4X, here is my setup :

ASUS P3V4X
192MB PC133 RUNNING @ CAS 2-2-2-5
2 10GB 5400 RPM HARD DRIVES
CELERON II 700 @ 877 (83FSB) 1.65V (1.7V DEFAULT CC0)
ATI RADEON 32MB DDR 166/333 @ 200/400

When I looked at the intel spec charts, i saw that is said that the Celeron II 800 would only work @ 100fsb. Is that right? or are they just saying that so people know that it runs at 100 not 66? Please help, does anyone know if any vendors are selling them yet, and does anyone have any experience overclocking these beasts? I am hoping to hit somewhere like 1ghz - 1.1ghz using air cooling, may opt for water if nessicary.

[GajoTNT]

well, it will run at 66 fsb, but the core speed of the cpu will be at 528 mhz, your only chance is to overclock the bus to 133mhz and with luck you will get a 1 gig CPU, no likely but good luck

[Carmine_Paterno]

I don't want it to run @ 66 i need it to run 133-140fsb. Can i do this or not, because if i am stuck @ 100fsb that would not be good, I don't understand why i wouldn't be able to?

[JaY_III]

Dont expet a celeron 800 to hit 140FSB.. that would be 1120 mHz... so you will be needing some very good cooling and luck.... 133 would be 1064.. may do that but cooling and luck better be with you.

Dont expect great results from the 800... If you need 133-140 FSB, you would have better luck with a P3 700, @133 it would be a 933, and that would kick a celerons *** at 1064

[Tim-]

Expecting a celermine core to go much beyond 900-950 is a path to disappointment- regardless of what it says on the label. However the only way to know for sure is to try it. I sure wouldn't buy one to find out... Not with PIII prices dropping.

If you really have to have 1 GHz+ why not just get a cc0 PIII and do it right- the celeron will still be slower, no matter what you do. As the cpu speed goes up, the L2 cache becomes even more important since it's executing more instructions, faster. This will require faster data rates to prevent a bottleneck and with half the cache size, and the fact that it ISN'T 8-way associative on the Celeron it's limited right out of the starting gate.

[Carmine_Paterno]

Yea but, a piii @ 700 costs almost 2x as much as a Celeron II 700 and the Celeron only has 1/2 the cache big deal. Thatz the only difference, not to mention the fsb issue, but if you o/c it is fine. I think i might be building a Thunderbird rig, but i am not sure, Thunderbirds can pump out some pretty mean numbers!!!

[Carmine_Paterno]

I think i am gonna give my Celeron II 700 another shot before i buy another chip. Has anyone ever heard of this motherboard --- SY6BA+4 from soyo?

Front Side Bus Options:
Available FSB options of 66/ 75/ 81/ 83/ 90/ 95/ 100/ 105/ 110/ 112/ 113/ 115/ 117/ 118/ 120/ 122/ 124/ 126/ 133/ 135/ 137/ 138/ 140/ 142/ 144/ 150/ 155MHz

With 90/95 i should hit like 950 + and burn in i will get 1.05ghz definetly, what do you guyz think?

[Phil]

Most celerons will do 900 no problem but few will do a gig or over, even with a burn in, I think your living in a dream world if you think it's definate man!

[Carmine_Paterno]

i don't mean definatly like definatly lol, i mean it will be a better chance than i ever had trying to burn it in @ 877 to try to get to 1.05ghz. I would just love to have 95fsb 997mhz and not to mention a much better bandwidth from 83fsb and 141 mhz my ram will be running at.

[Tim-]

It's a little bigger issue than you might think. It's not only half size cache, but the celermine is only 2-way associative cache vs 8-way for the PIII. It's not just the size, it's the way it can be utilized. Celermines are fine for what they are, but if you ever get a PIII and then go back to the celermine you'll know EXACTLY what I'm talking about.

For many applications it doesn't make a lot of difference, but for really cpu intensive ones it makes a big difference. Games are cpu intensive but they are typically bottlenecked by the video card, but in real applications the gap widens between the processors.

[Mr B]

Carmine_Paterno (Feb 16, 2001 12:48 p.m.):
I don't want it to run @ 66 i need it to run 133-140fsb. Can i do this or not, because if i am stuck @ 100fsb that would not be good, I don't understand why i wouldn't be able to?

Given the very high multiplier of this chip (Celeron 800), this is not a good candidate for o/cing. this one is worse than your current 700 is now. Which is worse than a 667, 633 on down.

If you got a C II to 140+ FSB you would be one of the first, (if not THE first) to do so. It just won't happen. I don't think God himself could do it.

Get a P/// 700. You will be a lot happier.

Mr B

[wild_andy_c]

Carmine - we find ourselves here again.

I should rename you to "Carmine the man who buys all the wrong chips".

Why on earth would anyone want a 800e celeron when all that it serves to be is a cC0 533a. The only celerons to buy are the 566 and 600 and preferably very good cB0's since cC0 steppings are quirkier.

The core of the cC0 does 1000Mhz on good days, the cream of the crop therefore being pulled and selected to be 1Ghz chips. But pretty much all of the other chips are re-badged, multiplier locked, bus locked, cache type determined and packeaged as anything from a Celeron 566 to a P3 933.

When you say that the only difference is the amount of cache you are wrong too. Since the type of cache is different. It is less associative than that of the P3 and as such performs terribly in comparison in the light of day.

It would seem Carmine that questions continue to be posted but that everyones advice falls on deaf ears.

Get a 600 m8 and realistically acheive some Goals.

[wild_andy_c]

And also to run RAm at 141Mhz in async it is necessary to have a 106Mhz FSB

[Carmine_Paterno]

thanx guyz, i am a very nieve person lol, at only 15 im sure u can see why. I need a new motherboard right now. One that goes to 85-95 fsb and i am getting that to push my celeron ii 700. I know it can do it since it can do 877 (83fsb) @ 1.65v not 1.7v which is the default.

[batboy]

Although Andy was being a little harsh, he was speaking the truth. You wonder why there is no cC0 C-533 processors, because Intell is calling them C-800 chips now. All coppermine CPUs, as Tim and Andy already pointed out, have the same basic core, C-II and P-III except the 1 gig P-III, which are hand picked chips that test the best. Expect the majority of the coppermines to do 900-950 MHz, anything more than that is an exceptional processor, good cooling, and a bit of luck. I say, overclock what you got if that's all you can afford and use this as a learning experience.

[Newbie_Doo]

RE Soyo boards:

If the SY6 is anything like my Sy7, you will be limited on the voltage adjustments to max +10%. At the speeds you are talking about (regardless of chip) you will need to give the chip enough voltage to run stably and you better have some VERY good cooling measures in place. My cB0 C2-600 runs just fine at 810mhz air cooled, will run at 902 but has spontaneous lockups that are thermal/voltage related. I need to rewire the VID pins for 1.90v default, but not until the watercooling rig is in place. I don't like keychains.