Celeron. What's the deal? 2

[Darrenb]

I was wondering if anyone could tell me what the differences are between the Celeron chip and the other Pentium chips. Aside from the cost, is there a fundamental difference that I should know about? Is the performance difference that noticeable?

If anyone could shed some light, I would be very appreciative. If anyone knows of any sites as well, that would be good!!!

Cheers

Darren

 

[davidianmage]

Hi,
Here is a good link for you!

http://www.dhs.org/pipermail/systalk/1999-April/003991.html

Hope that helps

Davidianmage

 

[swayda]

The pentium has a L1 cache. That means the cache is located on the board where the CPU is mounted. It is integrated into the cpu itself. The celeron and AMD have what is referred to as L2 caches. The cache is remotely mounted from the CPU and isn't as fast. However AMD and later celerons make up for that deficiency by having larger caches. Of course I might be totally wrong about that since I never used a celeron.

 

[gunthnp]

if you want to know more then you want to on the celeron check out

http://developer.intel.com/design/celeron/datashts/243658.htm

So long and thanks for all the fish.

 

[jgoodman00]

That sounds about right, & i believe the benfits of geniune pentium over celeron are mainly seen in complex mathematical operations. At this point the geniune pentiums are significantly quicker (from my experience).

So depending on what you plan on using it for, the celeron might be fine. Just don't expect it to work out the mass of the universe!!! James Goodman
j.goodman00@btinternet.com

 

[grid]

I concur. From a practical standpoint, think of it in car terms: A 4- cylinder Ford [Celeron] and
a 12 cyclinder Jaguar [P III/P4] will both take you down the highway. Its only when you need
significant additional power/speed that the difference really hits - but when it does, the other
processor is inherently more powerful.

 

[GuruChee]

>The pentium has a L1 cache. That means the cache is located on the
>board where the CPU is mounted. It is integrated into the cpu itself. The
>celeron and AMD have what is referred to as L2 caches.
Um, yes and no. All Pentiums (original, Pro, II, III 4, Celeron), AMD Athlon/Duron ALL have L1 cache on the chip die. The original Pentium had two 8KB L1 caches (for data and instructions). Starting with the MMX Pentium, all the Pentium now have two 16KB L1 caches. The K6-2 and K6-III both had two 32KB L1 caches while the Athlon series have two 64KB L1 caches. For trivia sake, the Pentium 4 has one 8KB data L1 cache. Instructions are fed to the processor by a new Execution Transfer Unit.

>The cache is
>remotely mounted from the CPU and isn't as fast. However AMD and
>later celerons make up for that deficiency by having larger caches. Of
>course I might be totally wrong about that since I never used a celeron.
Yes, you are totally wrong. ;-)
So let's take a look at the L2 cache situation. The Pentium, AMD K6-2 and the original Celeron (266 and 300) had no L2 cache. However, the Pentium II and the first Athlons both had 512KB of L2 cache outside the processor, sitting on a the printed circuit board alongside the processor (the infamous Slot 1 and Slot A packaging). Yes, this cache ran slower than the processor at only 1/2 speed and at 1/3 speed on the faster Athlons. The Celeron A and Celeron II have 128KB L2 cache. Another kink in this mess is that when Intel and AMD started putting the L2 cache back into the processor core the speed went backup for the cache. This occurred first when the Celeron was produced in the PPGA form for the Socket370 interface. The Pentium III brought the L2 cache back into the processor when it was released in the Flip Chip-PGA form and was reduced to 256KB in its Coppermine variant (slightly faster because it interfaced with the processor with a 256-bit bus as opposed to a 64-bit wide bus). For the Thunderbird Athlons, it too has reduced L2 cache to 256KB.

Hope you all don't mind the extended commentary, but let's keep our facts straight.

 

[Karl Blessing]

From what I can tell, if you want a compare to compare

Celeron (standard) is castorated, it only runs 66FSB
also a standard Celeron, duplicates it's L1 into it's L2 cache, thus limiting the ammount of cache to your processor (correct me if I am wrong)

far as the AMD line goes

Athlon 'Classic' Slot A = 128K L2 Off-die
Athlon Duron SocketA = 64K L2 On-Die
Athlon Thunderbird = 256K L2 On-Die

now from the statement I heard, you would think from highest to lowest

Tbird
Classic
Duron

for speed
when it is actually

Tbird
Duron
Classic

because, on-die cache runs at 100% of the speed of the processor, where as off die , is usally either 1/3rd or half the speed of the processor. Karl Blessing aka kb244{fastHACK}

 

[osuman]

So is on-die and off-die a different way of saying L1 and L2? I've been wondering. Justin
Feel free to email me at:
beckham@mailbox.orst.edu

 

[gunthnp]

no l1 is on chip l2 is off chip l2 can be on die but not on the cpu it's self and the new cerlerons have 100 fsb and they will be coming out with some that are 133 fsb if there not already out. So long and thanks for all the fish.

 

[osuman]

So on-die means it's running at the same speed as the processor? What the hell is the die anyway? Sorry, i'm just not understanding the difference here.

And where is that quote from "So long and thanks for all the fish."? Is it the Old Man and the Sea? Justin
Feel free to email me at:
beckham@mailbox.orst.edu

 

[twertman68]

all the socket celerons and pent 111 have on die L1 and L2, which means it is in the cpu itself.the celeron has 128 L2 where the Pent 111 has 256 L2.also the celeron has only 4 way L2 and the pent 111 has 8 way L2.so the celeron is not a cpu for heavy usage.if you just surf the internet and do common tasks the celeron is fine.