# Are CELERON processors all that bad?



## BigDaveinNJ (Jun 9, 2000)

OK... this computer is a DELL PIII 450 Mhz which has 128 meg of ram and a 16 meg video card.

Now... I saw an outstanding deal on a PC with a 2.4 gig CELERON processor and 256 meg of ram and a 32 meg video card.

Would I notice an improvement going from the PIII 450 to the 2.2 gig.... even though the latter is a CELERON?

What is the problem, in general, with CELERONS? Are they alot slower than a PIII or P4?

Just wondering........

DAVID in NJ


----------



## dai (Mar 7, 2003)

i use celerons all the time,because of the price.
i only surf so they suit me.
you should see a big difference upgrading but i would get them to double the ram


----------



## Lurker1 (Jan 30, 2001)

Hi David

Celerons have less onboard Cashe so they are slower. Take a look at the comparison table in this article and decide for yourself.

http://www6.tomshardware.com/cpu/20030217/index.html


----------



## McTimson (Aug 16, 2002)

If you get that PC, you will definitely notice an improvement. While Celeron's may not have much cache, which does affect performance, a 2.2 Celeron is certainly better than a 450 PIII. Plus the fact that this PC would have 256MB of RAM, which would greatly improve performance.

As long as you don't play any brand-new games (which I don't think you would be, since you have a 16MB video card), you will definitely noticean improvement.


----------



## Guest (Oct 19, 2003)

yes, Celron processors are horable. Only get a pc with a Celron processor if you're on a budget.


----------



## McTimson (Aug 16, 2002)

> Only get a pc with a Celron processor if you're on a budget.


....or if what you're using the computer for doesn't require massive CPU cache, and can do just fine with a lot of mhZ. (like internet browsing, email, music, movies, etc.) As long as you're not using programs that require lots of power (games, CAD stuff, image rendering), you'll be fine. It all depends on what you use the computer for.


----------



## PROJECT (Sep 25, 2003)

I dont know why you just wouldnt get an Athon XP for about the same price as a Celeron but much better performance


----------



## sharky (Jul 9, 2001)

I had a 633mhz/256mb/7.5gbHD/celeron with dsl. 

Now i have a 2.3/256mb/40gb/pen4 with dsl.


maybe because of dsl,i do not see any great benefits with the pen 4,keeping in mind i just surf and watch audio streaming 99.99% of the time. so far,and i could go to prison for this , i was just as happy with the celeron computer with dsl


----------



## McTimson (Aug 16, 2002)

Exactly, because you're not oding many processor intensive things. If you were trying to play games, or encode media, then you would notice a huge difference.


----------



## buddhafabio (Aug 5, 2002)

you can always upgrade the cpu to a p4 later on down the road and see a big differance


----------



## Spinach (Jan 4, 2000)

Yup, buddhafabio has a good idea! Thats what i usually do if i upgrade to a different socket processor. Go Celeron first then up to the better processor later so you don't have to lump out too much money at once! The 2.2 Celeron is going to keep you happy for a while, i'm sure.

Hex, where's your justification?


----------



## sleekluxury (Oct 5, 2003)

My Emachines had a Celeron, and crashed a couple times, but that may be because it was a 700MHZ and had 98. Lol...My new one hasn't really crashed on me yet, touch wood it won't, and it's got a Pentium 4 2GHZ W/XP that may be why.


----------



## sleekluxury (Oct 5, 2003)

I would just stick with the INTEL PENTIUM 4 Processor's, i want a HT (Hyper Threading) 3.2GHZ.


----------



## Guest (Nov 11, 2003)

i like that new celerons they are very worth it...if you are in a pickle money wise

the new ones can do all teh stuff that the pentium 3 and 4's can do.........but they ARE slower than pentium 4's

here's the order

486Dx266
Pentium
OLD Celeron
Penitum 2
Pentium 3
NEW Celeron
Pentium 4

k?

they are not crap......though........in comparison to pentium 4's they are worse.......

it's a good chip though.

it's just had some of it's nads cut off (ok...bad example)


----------



## lanxprt (Nov 19, 2003)

I have been running the same dual Celeron 366 computer since 1999 with W2K Advanced server on it for my home network. It is bullet proof. And if you want to get real geeky you can overclock those Cellies with no problem !


----------



## Servant of Eru (Sep 13, 2003)

That's true, from what I hear, you can overclock a Celeron of whatever kind to the speed of it's base. (i.e. PII base Celeron, PII speeds; PIII base Celeron, PIII speeds; P4 base Celeron, P4 speeds...etc.) Celeron's are good, there're nearly indestructible too. My old laptop had a Celeron, and while it crashed all the time, it was the crappy heatsink and bad app of tech by the manufacturer, not the chip's fault.  I don't know how many times I dropped that thing though, and even when the case of it broke, I can still hook it up to a monitor, and the insides work fine!!!


----------



## Servant of Eru (Sep 13, 2003)

Also, with a 32 meg Vid card, you should be able to play most games from '01-'02 just fine, though you may have to stick to lower resolutions to avoid lag. I had a 16 meg card on my laptop, and I was able to get away with Aliens Versus Predator 2, albeit with a terrible lag. But if I'm not mistaken, with a 32 meg card, it should run ok.  Age of Mythology worked fine on it though.


----------



## dannyboyfx (Nov 19, 2003)

i hear that a celeron can be overclocked a little bit better than a P4, but i don't actually know about that. I like my celeron. it is a 1.2 and able to handel GTA VC


----------

