Best Performance For The Money Intel Chip

[shill88]

Hi

I have a spare Intel slot1 mobo that supports 133fsb. I'm gonna build another system around it and wanted to hear your suggestions on the CPU to use. I was think of a Celeron 667 and going for 1000 10x100. Is there any better value going right now that could get me too 1gig or close

Windows 2000
Asus A7V133
1100 Thunderbird@1133 With a Swiftech MC370-0A on it :( I guess I'm one of the unlucky ones.
320MB's Infineon CAS2 PC133
Asus v6600 Deluxe
Realtec Nic
SB Live Value
Pioneer 10/40x DVD
Plextor 12/10/32 CD-RW
Generic Floppy
Maxtor DiamondMax 60 30.0GB 7200 ATA100
Maxtor 20.0GB 5400RPM ATA66 Drive
The 2 Maxtors are in a Raid 0 array. If you have never experienced Raid I really suggest you try it.0 Its unbelieveable! My drives aren't even that good!

[Placid]

Celeron 800 is about $20 more and would be easier to get to 1ghz.
You would also be starting at 100mhz so you would get better performance.
All 800's are cC0 stepping where as a 667 is cB0 or cC0.

[William]

Get a P/// 700 bump the fsb to 133 and you are 933. Will be faster than the celey 667@1ghz because of the better core of the P///. You can find them for around $110 all over the place. BTW, the stock celey cooler will not let you get to 1ghz(gee big suprise).

[ken257]

I have to second the P3 700 recomendation. For just a little bit extra outlay of $ you will be getting a lot more performance. Double the cache and a higher fsb(when OC'd) means greater ram speed, these things add up to make a very noticeable difference.

[Mr B]

I'll third the motion..

While a Celeron (the 566 and 600 would be better choices for overclocking, BTW...) might hit that 1 GHz mark, it's roughly the equivalent of a P/// (Coppermine) running about 200 MHz slower, due to the higher FSB and better L2 cache of the P///. So roughly speaking;

A 1 GHz Celeron = an 800 MHz P/// Also, by the same token;

A P///700 @ 933 = a Celeron @ 1.1 GHz+ (1100MHz+)

I've got a P///600E (Coppermine) @ 954, and a Celeron 600 @ 1053. the P/// smokes the Celly in the real world. Don't just go by benchmark numbers, exclusively. Sandra reports higher numbers for my Celeron, but my rig BOOTS and OPENS APPS much faster w/ the P///.

If I could be guarranteed a 59% overclock, (the same as my current P/// 600E) I'd trade BOTH the C600 and the 600E for a 700E, in a New York heartbeat.

My $.02

Mr B

[Pinky]

William (Jun 11, 2001 03:26 a.m.):
BTW, the stock celey cooler will not let you get to 1ghz(gee big suprise).

I disagree, I've used the stock intel hsf in many overclocks, including the celeron 667at 1 Ghz at 1.75V and 37C idle temp.

A lot of attention is paid to cooling a stubborn processor, sometimes you get lucky (with celerons) and you actually get a good cpu that runs well at almost any speed.

[daver343]

Mr. B you said the A P3 at any given clock can compete with a Celeron thats 200mhz + because the Pentium-3 has a better cache and higher FSB.

"A P///700 @ 933 = a Celeron @ 1.1 GHz+ (1100MHz+)"

Well, what about my Friends Celeron 800@1255Mhz? Thats on a 150 or 155mhz FSB.

Now if were talkin the average Celeron at 1Ghz or 1.1 or whatever, ya, the P3 will crush it. But if you have a Celeron on a higher bus that the P3, i'd think the Celeron would crush the P3. Thats also taking into consideration that Celeron is clocked faster too.

[Mr B]

I guess the point I'm trying to make here is this.

A P/// 700E chip, you can virtually expect (not always, but the majority of the time) 133 FSB (933 MHz). A fair amount of them will go faster than that, as well.

Quite honestly, what percentage of the Celeron 800E's do you really expect will achieve overclocks in the 150 (or more) FSB range?? Honestly?? I sincerely don't belive the percentage is high.

I'm looking at the odds of the chip making an overclock, stable. The P/// is a tried and true performer.... the C800E is still a bit unproven, IMHO...

The more I see, and read that these will continually and frequently surpass 133 (or 150 even!) FSB, I'll be avidly pushing them myself.

I think the results are a bit inconclusive at this point.

Mr B

[Placid]

I think everyone missed the point. he was looking
at a $40. cpu. I suggested spending $60 for a 800 celeron might be worth it.
All of a sudden everyones suggesting buying a $100 cpu.
Maybe I missed somthing but I think low price was
was the point.

[Pinky]

Placid (Jun 12, 2001 04:20 p.m.):
I think everyone missed the point. he was looking
at a $40. cpu. I suggested spending $60 for a 800 celeron might be worth it.
All of a sudden everyones suggesting buying a $100 cpu.
Maybe I missed somthing but I think low price was
was the point.

Yup, that is right -- price is supposed to be key; if I spend $75.00 on cooling, I'm losing the benefit of overclocking and could buy the cpu I'm OCing up to retail with no heat issues to ever be concerned with.