Hey fellas, my girlfriend has the option of bringing home an Intel Pentium 4, 2.8 Ghz, 512 RAM from the office to replace our current home office computer. Will this be faster than the Intel Celeron R, 2.8 Ghz, 1 GB RAM computer I already have in our office? Do I need to look at any other stats to help answer the question? Thanks.
Need to figure out which computer is faster
- Thread starter confusedcompute
- Start date
- Status
Doing what?
The office computer doesn't have enough memory to make a fair comparison... on certain processes, with the same amount of memory, the Pentium 4 will be faster... but you will have a difficult time telling which as a blind man in a dark room with a funeral cloth over your head for most routine processes.
The office computer doesn't have enough memory to make a fair comparison... on certain processes, with the same amount of memory, the Pentium 4 will be faster... but you will have a difficult time telling which as a blind man in a dark room with a funeral cloth over your head for most routine processes.
captaincranky
Posts: 19,684 +8,825
It sort of depends on which incarnation of Celeron to which we're referring.
That said, you would, (as has been mentioned) need to install matching quantities of memory to even consider making a performance comparison. Win XP needs at least 1GB of RAM before it stops using the HDD page file as "available RAM" in all but the simplest tasks.
The 65nm Cedar Mill Celerons, (which were the last single cores introduced before a big change to dual core Celes) would pretty much take the measure of many P4s. Keep in mind these chips had very high clock speeds, and double the cache of the Prescott Celerons.
My personal experience with Prescott & Cedar Mill Celerons has been in comparison with a 3.06Ghz non-hyper threading 519 P4. I observed perhaps not even a 10% differential in performance between the CPUs. However, the Celes tend to "time out" a bit more when initializing large files or a Volume HDD, which is I suppose attributable to the smaller caches. My Cedar Mill 356 (3,33 GHz) was a dead heat with the P4.
That said, you would, (as has been mentioned) need to install matching quantities of memory to even consider making a performance comparison. Win XP needs at least 1GB of RAM before it stops using the HDD page file as "available RAM" in all but the simplest tasks.
The 65nm Cedar Mill Celerons, (which were the last single cores introduced before a big change to dual core Celes) would pretty much take the measure of many P4s. Keep in mind these chips had very high clock speeds, and double the cache of the Prescott Celerons.
My personal experience with Prescott & Cedar Mill Celerons has been in comparison with a 3.06Ghz non-hyper threading 519 P4. I observed perhaps not even a 10% differential in performance between the CPUs. However, the Celes tend to "time out" a bit more when initializing large files or a Volume HDD, which is I suppose attributable to the smaller caches. My Cedar Mill 356 (3,33 GHz) was a dead heat with the P4.
- Status
Similar threads
