• Welcome to Overclockers Forums! Join us to reply in threads, receive reduced ads, and to customize your site experience!

2.67mhz for low cost

Overclockers is supported by our readers. When you click a link to make a purchase, we may earn a commission. Learn More.

glenda17

Registered
Joined
Mar 22, 2003
Been running for a week now with a new system I built on the cheap. It is an ECS P4vxasd2+ 5.0 with an Intel Celeron running at 2667 mhz. Very stable setup. For the price I cant complain, but the 3D performance isnt the greatest with the $35 Geforce2 card I bought (4600 3dmark2001). I may throw a better card in it to see if I can get the 3D scores up
 
i like your proc OC but definitely OC or upgrade the vidcard, i reccomend a minimum of a gf4 ti 4200 but to have something that can run with alot of goodies on i'd go with at least the r9500 pro
 
glenda17 said:
Been running for a week now with a new system I built on the cheap. It is an ECS P4vxasd2+ 5.0 with an Intel Celeron running at 2667 mhz. Very stable setup. For the price I cant complain, but the 3D performance isnt the greatest with the $35 Geforce2 card I bought (4600 3dmark2001). I may throw a better card in it to see if I can get the 3D scores up
you will need more that a new video card with the celeron cpu.:( unfortunately, intel murdered the L2 cache on the cpu, only giving it 128mb, as opposed to the 512mb that the northwoods get. that is what really makes the 3dm scores go up. when i first got into intel, i scored really low in 3dm, as i had a 2.0 willo, and a radeon 8500, and SDRAM, the ram and the cpu were holding me back. now fortunately, I AM MUCH WISER.;)
 
Re: Re: 2.67mhz for low cost

jdmcnudgent said:
you will need more that a new video card with the celeron cpu.:( unfortunately, intel murdered the L2 cache on the cpu, only giving it 128mb, as opposed to the 512mb that the northwoods get. that is what really makes the 3dm scores go up. when i first got into intel, i scored really low in 3dm, as i had a 2.0 willo, and a radeon 8500, and SDRAM, the ram and the cpu were holding me back. now fortunately, I AM MUCH WISER.;)

You mean 128kb and 512kb right?


Yes that celeron is a nice value, however in the long run for gaming etc, mhz dosent always mean perofmance. The 128k cache on that celeron is really going to hurt you. That celeron will probably run at 3ghz no problem, but that still dosent equal to a 2.2 p4 with 512k. However, if you drop a nice video card in there, you should be able to perform well enough for quite some time, and look at the bright side, you will be able to upgrade sooner or later to a different chip :)
 
Yes I know about the weak cache, I set this system up for divx/mp3 but to get a decent card for TV out I figured I might as well spend a little more and get a card that will help 3D games.

I did research on the 3DMark2001 database and believe it or not with an ATI 9700/9500 card people are pulling in 14000 with an overclocked celeron like mine. Now I would think at that speed I would be able to play games for a while on this thing.

I have always been a believer in building a system with a budget cpu and a strong video card. The last system I built was in the 3dfx days, that card made any cpu look good.
 
Yep, thats the wonder of build your own system, you are in control. My next pc will probably be an 800fsb p4, with dual channel ddr to push my gf3 as far as it possibly can. I generally like to push my gfx card with high end cpu/chipsets.
 
I have a similar setup as yours, but with a Ti4200 64MB. However I can't break 10k 3DMarks so I would highly suggest getting a Radeon 9500(pro) or better. I've also always believed in building systems with a budget CPU, leaving more funds for other quality components as good RAM/HDD/GPU etc. etc. Often a system like this simply runs better and smoother when compared to a 'real' CPU handling generic crap components.
 
Last edited:
Krowa 02 said:
Yep, thats the wonder of build your own system, you are in control. My next pc will probably be an 800fsb p4, with dual channel ddr to push my gf3 as far as it possibly can. I generally like to push my gfx card with high end cpu/chipsets.
that system will be such a waste for a 4x agp card like a gf3.:( you will need something along the lines of a radeon 9800.:D
 
Lancelot, how do you do with commache 4 with your celeron and ge4 4200?
 
I agree with jdmcnudgent. Putting a GF3 into a canterwood/springdale system would be a waste of the mobo and cpu. You can push that card to it's "limits" with an AMD 1600. Hell, you could probably do it with a 1 Ghz cpu. I had a GF3 on my first custom computer, a 700 Mhz Duron, and it was running everything fine!

Keep your current system and get yourself a nice video card. Games these days DO NOT rely half as much on CPU power as they do on GPU power.

Playing UT2003, if you had a GF3 with a good mobo and a good cpu, you wouldn't be able to touch a R9700 with a "decent" mobo and "decent" cpu.
 
Krowa 02 said:
Yep putting a gf3 into a springdale/canterwood is pretty much a waste, but im gonna do it anyway cause I hate my amd system, to much noise and heat!
o well, im stuck with my 8500 in the 8x agp for now. im poor, and when i have the money, ill upgrade.;) i cant wait to bench my 8500 in 3dm2k1 when i get my correct memory.:cool:
 
Amino said:
Playing UT2003, if you had a GF3 with a good mobo and a good cpu, you wouldn't be able to touch a R9700 with a "decent" mobo and "decent" cpu.

Only n00bs play ut2003 online with eyecandy on though. :) So if you care more for online competition than (single player) visuals, then an older videocard like a GF3 does not have to be a problem as long as your cpu is strong enough.
 
dude, if you wanted a lot of performance for "not a whole bunch of money" then why would you not go with an athlonxp.... ??????????????????????????????????? celeron = crap
i'm not gonna say that intel is better than amd, or vice versa.

the p4 and the athlonxp are both GREAT cpus. the Duron and the Celeron both suck more than anything...... and that's a lot of sucking. an athlonxp 2000+ or a p4 2 ghz (nwood b, of course) would outperform a celeron clocked way ahead of it, and they are both available cheap. you can get an athlonxp 2100 for just about 100 bucks. make sure it's tbred b, and it'll get over 2.1 ghz with care, and whoo-wa..... more bang fer yer buck than any celeron crap system. oh yeah, spend more on yer mobo than yer cpu.... (hint, buy the asus a7n8x)
 
FIZZ3 said:


Only n00bs play ut2003 online with eyecandy on though. :) So if you care more for online competition than (single player) visuals, then an older videocard like a GF3 does not have to be a problem as long as your cpu is strong enough.

I don't mean to be a flamer here but...

Honestly, I think it's people who don't have the money for better equipment who say that. Obviously you do have money since your system is pretty nice, but playing with everything turned off is not going to improve your ability to shoot someone by that much. In Quake3, when people used to use a mipmap of 16 or so, that's just ridiculous. It's like playing it on an Atari. All you see is squares moving across your screen. If anything, I'd say it made it harder to distinguish stuff because you can tell what's a wall and what's a player because evrything is so blurry, they blend in.

Not using eyecandy to improve your skills also shows that you don't have skills because you need something to improve them. Owning with the eye candy on shows not only that you can aim and move, but also that you can deal with the inconsistency and unpredictability that is tyhe internet and the limitations of a PC. That's the way they intended the game to be played.
 
I probably didnt research the AMD's enough. I ruled them out because I had a cyrix and it was crap, then a PIII it was great and I said I will always buy intel because of the stability, back then AMD and cyrix lagged intel on FPU and graphics I just assumed that the current AMD's still do. Still with the low clock speeds of AMD you have to give up something, this celeron runs 2.67 ghz and hasnt crashed one time.

I ordered a gforce 4200, I should get 10000 on 3dmark2001, which will hold me over till I get a P4 2.8. I really built the system for internet and DIVX the games were a second thought, for DIVX I believe this celeron 2.67 is faster than any $80 AMD? If not I screwed up.
 
Amino said:
Not using eyecandy to improve your skills also shows that you don't have skills because you need something to improve them. Owning with the eye candy on shows not only that you can aim and move, but also that you can deal with the inconsistency and unpredictability that is tyhe internet and the limitations of a PC. That's the way they intended the game to be played.

Altough this discussion is a bit beyond this thread's scope I'd like to address your points nonetheless.

Whether I have "skills" or not is an empirical question, but your reasoning for proclaiming a lack thereof is not sound.

Imagine a virtual skill-scale of 0 to 100. Suppose I score 54 by myself. Now whether I suck or rule at that level is not so important. What is important is that it can be improved by tuning the game experience ever so slightly. Maybe I can scrape a couple of points and play at 60 on the scale. That is good for me no matter how you look at it.
You could claim that I should reach 100 all by myself on a P2-300 with all the eyecandy on, but that is just not realistic. There is no absolute maximum, there is only the drive to progress.

Now this is all still quite abstract and one important thing is missing from the discussion. That is how big the difference actually is. Hardware alone creates a huge gap. Ping most of all, but also FPS and screen real estate. There is no denying this and it leads to an unfairness inherent to the game. Now why should you take this hardware (dis-)advantage for granted but refuse to attenuate it by setting up the game for better performance?
As far as the visuals are concerned- the eye candy adds needless clutter, creating quite a few situations where you cannot see what is happening whereas you could have with the stuff disabled. Yet, more importantly it will drop your framerate overall. This in turn leads to decreased damage given by dmg/sec weapons. Note that this is directly tied in with your hardware's power.
However, the real kicker is in the heaviest fights- when the screen is filled with moving foes, bursting and flying projectiles and when you move and turn very fast. Even with the burliest system, framerates will slow to below acceptable levels and when the screen stutters so does your own performance.
 
:argue:

Ok, and here's what I have to say to that:

The veracity of your statements is explicable, notwithstanding the fact that what I have simply stated was one who can not achieve equivalent feats of gaming prowess with the minutiae and nice points of the game turned on is not as good a player as one who can do so. Nevertheless, regardless of how well you can do without details maximized does not change the reality that you are not proficient enough to compete with those who are better able to play and own with everything on. Yes, playing with a p2 300 would be quite unfeasible, while having all details on, but then again, it would be almost impossible to play the game and enjoy it at all on a system like that. You had better stick to Quake II. And do you believe that things in Quake II are clearer than they are in UT2003? Because there are obviously less details in that game. If so, why even bother playing UT2003? There are still QII players…

You referred to me as a n00b for playing with details on, however, I don’t believe that you can justify this claim with your aforementioned reasoning. n00bs are those who basically suck. If one requires additional assistance in the game to improve his gaming proficiency, he is clearly more of a n00b than one who does not need that extra lift.

In addition, turning on details only clears up blending and needless clutter. For example, it allows you to see your opponent more easily (coronas and flares). Increasing the details of the world only makes the world clearer and sharper. Decreasing it such would make it blurry and harder to tell apart a level ground from a small ledge. Your claim of making the game more cluttered has no basis.

The main points of this are firstly, you are far to quick to throw names around, and secondly, I love your use of the English language:p.
 
I agree with you Celerons are crap. I score 5000 3dmarks with 1.6P4-A and Geforce 2 card. A Ghz difference but still slower. Intel should take away Celerons like that and put on market Celerons like they were in P2 days. Just my litlle opinion.
 
Back