Which of you stll use a pentium 4.
- Thread starter abhinit90
- Start date
- Status
Bahh, do you even need that power?
The difference between the 2 processors you're talking about is huge (not to mention the price difference.
You mentioned yourself you're not a power user. If you don't play games, you don't do anything other than Office, surf the web, some music.... Your Celeron would suffice.
If you play some games, that P4 would be good.
If you play some games, and don't mind spending some money, the E4300 should suffice (great overclocker too, and its not motherboard dependant).
The E6600 is way over what you'll need, especially teamed with that graphics card I reckon.
The difference between the 2 processors you're talking about is huge (not to mention the price difference.
You mentioned yourself you're not a power user. If you don't play games, you don't do anything other than Office, surf the web, some music.... Your Celeron would suffice.
If you play some games, that P4 would be good.
If you play some games, and don't mind spending some money, the E4300 should suffice (great overclocker too, and its not motherboard dependant).
The E6600 is way over what you'll need, especially teamed with that graphics card I reckon.
captaincranky
Posts: 19,682 +8,822
Um.....
The Cedar Mill P4 (HT) 641 3.2GHz in retail box is $75.00 at newegg w free shipping. For $5.00 more I'd have a spare fan/heatsink which at the very least would make a unique paperweight. But, we're pretty close to the same train of thought.
But, how much of an improvement do you think the P4 would be over my Celeron? Keep in mind these new Cedar mill chips are not your parents Celerons. They're 65nm process with a 512 MB L2 Cache.
The big jump to the P4 would be Hyperthread, 800MHz FSB, (my RAM is only 667 though), and a 2MB L2 Cache. I wish I had bought the P4 first, but the price hadn't bottomed out yet. So would the P4 be $75.00 better?
MoMo1988 said:
The Cedar Mill P4 (HT) 641 3.2GHz in retail box is $75.00 at newegg w free shipping. For $5.00 more I'd have a spare fan/heatsink which at the very least would make a unique paperweight. But, we're pretty close to the same train of thought.
But, how much of an improvement do you think the P4 would be over my Celeron? Keep in mind these new Cedar mill chips are not your parents Celerons. They're 65nm process with a 512 MB L2 Cache.
The big jump to the P4 would be Hyperthread, 800MHz FSB, (my RAM is only 667 though), and a 2MB L2 Cache. I wish I had bought the P4 first, but the price hadn't bottomed out yet. So would the P4 be $75.00 better?
MoMo1988
Posts: 75 +0
the pentium 4 3.0E HT is a socket 478 the only thing higher i found for that socket was the extreme edition 3.4. otherwise if you have a 775 socket the 75.00 one would be cheap. and the 3.0 is a 800 mhz. the price seemed to have gone up for some reason..... i bought mine for 70.00.here is the link anyways.
I personally think the p4 is definetly a good deal, my friend owns one and it runs really smooth gaming or just browsing applications. and 2mb cache is very nice compared to mine 1mb, and the ram would be just fine. trust me.
I personally think the p4 is definetly a good deal, my friend owns one and it runs really smooth gaming or just browsing applications. and 2mb cache is very nice compared to mine 1mb, and the ram would be just fine. trust me.
captaincranky
Posts: 19,682 +8,822
Oops.......
It does look like as though a 2.8 Northwood P4 is as high as you could go: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819116215
The 3.0 (socket 478)is a Prescott listed as 800MHz FSB @ $85.00 which as deals du jour go, sucks. The 478 guys are getting harder to find. Much of it is probably old stock, bought under old pricing schedules, and the retailers may be taking the loss instead of Intel. At this point in time the older socket processors are probably considered replacement parts, not build me a new computer thingys.
That's not as bad as it seems, being "stuck" with the Northwood option, mostly because the Prescotts "just don't get no respect".
tiesont said:and where did you find that? 'cause i've not found one that cheap (of course, i didn't spend a lot of time looking)
EDIT: forgot to mention, my system bus maxes out at 533 Mhz, so I can't use the highest end 478 pentium 4
It does look like as though a 2.8 Northwood P4 is as high as you could go: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819116215
The 3.0 (socket 478)is a Prescott listed as 800MHz FSB @ $85.00 which as deals du jour go, sucks. The 478 guys are getting harder to find. Much of it is probably old stock, bought under old pricing schedules, and the retailers may be taking the loss instead of Intel. At this point in time the older socket processors are probably considered replacement parts, not build me a new computer thingys.
That's not as bad as it seems, being "stuck" with the Northwood option, mostly because the Prescotts "just don't get no respect".
captaincranky
Posts: 19,682 +8,822
I think you mean.....
The next thing you'll try to tell me is that a Lamborghini Diablo isn't practical to drive in downtown Tokyo. Like I'd believe that.
<(roll eyes)
I'm guilty by omission. The one application I use the most is Photoshop Elements 5.0. (Well, other than Firefox). I THINK it is written for multiple processors. I'm sure the new Photoshop CS3 is. This is because the Mac graphics guys use it on the G series Macs with dual processors.
Actually, the only time that the dual proc setups are taxed is when applying major changes such as resizing or applying filters on images in lossless formats like TIFF and PSD files, particularly to large (say 13" x 19") high resolution files (300 DPI) for output to the printer.
I think you're probably right about my needs. But, the huge price drop on the E6600 has found a way to resonate with my severe shopping addiction. I'm gonna try to shake it off. Wish me luck.
The reviews at Newegg are frustrating for me in that of the 1100 reviews for the E6600, close to 1099 are all from enthusiasts saying "I overclocked mine to .....a billion GHZ". You could actually start to wonder if the darn thing is any good out of the box at stock speed, really.
At $173.00 the C2D E6320 (4 MB L2 cache) seems like a good idea too. Although now we're down to 1.86GHz and it starts to get difficult to get your head around the difference between bunches of clock cycles and what gets done during said bunches of clock cycles. I tell ya it's angst inducing, it is.
How about the 4400 Allendale? He said, somewhat sheepishly.
In fairness to the original topic of this thread, I get these results: (yours may vary).
Using Nero Recode to burn a Single Layer DVD @ 100% quality, 1 pass (direct to disc
Emachines w 3.06 Celeron Prescott 1GB DDR2 533MHz; About 12 minutes
Emachines T-5026 3.06 Prescott P4 1.5GB DDR 333MHz; About 12 minutes
Homebuilt 3.33GHz Celeron Cedar Mill w 3GB DDR2 667MHz; About 12 minutes.
At the end of the day, repititous, but nothing to be ashamed of.
CMH said:
CMH said:
The next thing you'll try to tell me is that a Lamborghini Diablo isn't practical to drive in downtown Tokyo. Like I'd believe that.
<(roll eyes)
I'm guilty by omission. The one application I use the most is Photoshop Elements 5.0. (Well, other than Firefox). I THINK it is written for multiple processors. I'm sure the new Photoshop CS3 is. This is because the Mac graphics guys use it on the G series Macs with dual processors.
Actually, the only time that the dual proc setups are taxed is when applying major changes such as resizing or applying filters on images in lossless formats like TIFF and PSD files, particularly to large (say 13" x 19") high resolution files (300 DPI) for output to the printer.
I think you're probably right about my needs. But, the huge price drop on the E6600 has found a way to resonate with my severe shopping addiction. I'm gonna try to shake it off. Wish me luck.
The reviews at Newegg are frustrating for me in that of the 1100 reviews for the E6600, close to 1099 are all from enthusiasts saying "I overclocked mine to .....a billion GHZ". You could actually start to wonder if the darn thing is any good out of the box at stock speed, really.
At $173.00 the C2D E6320 (4 MB L2 cache) seems like a good idea too. Although now we're down to 1.86GHz and it starts to get difficult to get your head around the difference between bunches of clock cycles and what gets done during said bunches of clock cycles. I tell ya it's angst inducing, it is.
How about the 4400 Allendale? He said, somewhat sheepishly.
In fairness to the original topic of this thread, I get these results: (yours may vary).
Using Nero Recode to burn a Single Layer DVD @ 100% quality, 1 pass (direct to disc
Emachines w 3.06 Celeron Prescott 1GB DDR2 533MHz; About 12 minutes
Emachines T-5026 3.06 Prescott P4 1.5GB DDR 333MHz; About 12 minutes
Homebuilt 3.33GHz Celeron Cedar Mill w 3GB DDR2 667MHz; About 12 minutes.
At the end of the day, repititous, but nothing to be ashamed of.
MetalX
Posts: 1,364 +4
As you once didsupersmashbrada said:
BEFORE you joined and got computer-nerdy and got an insane beast of a PC :stickout:I had a Pentium 4 Northwood 2.26GHz overclocked to 2.72GHz for about 6 months. It was pretty fast, but nothing compared to my Athlon 64 3200+ @ 3800+
I still have it, but it's in my Mom's computer now.mica3speedy
Posts: 87 +0
I have a P4 3.06 w/ 1gb ram in a laptop I use for regular every day use.
- Status
Similar threads
Latest posts
-
Bending metal: The changing server business- Arbie replied
-
Ryzen 7 5800X3D vs. Ryzen 7 7800X3D, Ryzen 9 7900X3D and 7950X3D- Q Wales replied
