Pentium vs Celeron

[Ilovellamas]

That is good to know. I would hate to think that the forums were in any way biased toward this rule. I'm sure they are not, and the forums on the whole seem to be a very nice place to spend a little free time.

 

[ANMMark]

I honestly think one or two people there have taken more offense to FlyingPants than should have been taken. Perhaps his post could be considered over Zealous. At the same time, "some" (I will not state any names) of the replies telling him to calm his manner could be considered quite hypocritical.

I agree with everything you have said, with exception to the above quoted statement.

There were only 2 of us that commented on his attitude, and in my view, just the right amount of offense was taken.

He personally asked me if I was insane.

WHO TOLD YOU THIS??? ARE YOU INSANE????

Then he blamed me personally for his friend buying a computer that did not suit his needs.

a friend of a friend recently bought a dell celeron (piece of GARBAGE) because he read this forum

If that wasn't offensive, and uneducated, I don't know what is.

 

[Exon]

The argument can be based on par with choosing Linux for a network over Windows. With Linux you have a cheaper alternative. And more than likely a more stable and secure enviroment. You do however suffer a loss when it comes to user support. A buisness cannot rely on forums.

You are basing this on initial cost. Base this on cost of staffing three system admins (3x8hr shifts = 24hrs) to support your *nix environment. Now look at the cost of staffing three system admins (again: 3x8hr shifts = 24hrs) to support your Windows environment. Tell me which one costs more?

We looked into this for our office - result: Linux support = harder to find in a qualified technician who is local = higher price required to bring THREE technicians to the area.

Windows support = easier to find a qualified technician who is local = lower price required to bring THREE technicians to the area.

In all honesty it is even easier to service the Windows machines, as we are able to outsource a tech for a few hours to get the machines setup properly, then from there as it is all simple, common, GUI - we are able to easily upgrade/add/maintain the systems. Whereas simple changes in Linux would be more costly as we would have to outsource yet again.

Perhaps you should post again once you have sobered up.

 

[flyingpants]

my post wasn't all about slandering dells. i'm just of the opinion that buying a dell is useless when the same computer can be bought for thousands less elsewhere. i'm sure you have loads of fun with your 4gb and whatever else you've got in there, but i'm also sure you wasted a lot of money. but let's get back on topic, shall we..

i did overreact a bit, sorry about that.. but saying "the information is on intel's site!!" is not enough, thats just asking me to take your word for it. you go find me a page on intel.com site where it's clearly stated that pentium 4 CPUs run at half the CPU's clock speed. which obviously won't be stated anywhere on the site because that simply doesnt make any sense. :crazy2:

celerons are perfectly fine for desktop users, i don't doubt it. neither would i doubt my old 1700+ or a pentium III for the most part. but with the case of the celeron, there are better CPUs for less money.

 

[Ilovellamas]

It is funny Exon how you have pretty much agreed with me. I stated that initialy Linux may look to be a better option. I also stated that Windows had much better support. You are agreeing and disagreeing with my summing up a small number of points which can be taken into account. Ontop of what I've previously stated, it was a quick comparision between things which "can" be compared in the point I was trying to make: Different situations call for different solutions. You proved this point with the example you just gave me.

That makes very little sense to me. I honestly do not feel that my post was that hard to understand. Despite the fact I have had a drink or two, I am not so far gone I am utterly incoherent.

Perhaps you should read what I posted a little more carefuly.

In reply to ANMMark. I still felt that the replies were a little harsh toward him. I did not mean you in paticular however. Though some of the replies seemed a little "off" and a tad aggressive in reply. Perhaps he was insulting, but that does not call for anyone to lower themselves to the same level.

 

[Exon]

llama,
I did read what you posted - in fact I quoted it! You stated:

The argument can be based on par with choosing Linux for a network over Windows. With Linux you have a cheaper alternative. And more than likely a more stable and secure enviroment. You do however suffer a loss when it comes to user support. A buisness cannot rely on forums.

That was what I disagreed with.

And Mr. Pants - it's not that I'll have fun with my 4GB of ram and whatever else I have in here - it's that the quality of our Terminal Services users will increase INCREDIBLY thanks to the fact we will be multiplying our current single Terminal Server by 8 (4x per server and 2 servers to handle the job). Didn't mean to lose you in the fact that the two machines were not purchased for workstations, but rather servers. In fact - I had mentioned this.

Back to Mr. llama - while everyone was typing replys I was still focused on my single reply. You see - posting on HD is not my primary job - while answering tech calls and fixing PCs are. You see - my time between clicking the "reply" button and clicking "submit" can vary. I also have slight ADD and if I am not doing more than 3 or 4 tasks at once I become bored very quickly.

 

[Ilovellamas]

I can understand your disagreeing with that. Perhaps I should have worded myself a little better. Though, as I am sure you can agree, if I went in depth with my "quick" comparison between Celerons and Pentiums in regard to Windows and Linux, the thread would have quickly lost context.

I'm also not too fussed on how long it takes you to reply. I have very little to do right now in all honestly. It's 9:45 at night for me right now, and after having a couple of drinks with a friend I have a very lazy night to enjoy. The discussion at hand gives me a way to fill in a little free time.

 

[server38]

I have never been too big on the Celeron. It has nothing to do with the marketing scheme of Intel, or the "weaknesses" of Celeron, but solely on personal preference. This is what I feel is the behind-the-scenes ideology of this entire topic. Some people don't mind the Celeron, some want Pentium all the way, while others are all over AMD.

If you have the money to spend on a P4, then go for it, chances are you will get a better performance out of it due to the mentioned.

When I build PCs for people, I tend to suggest them adding in a Celeron instead of a straight out Pentium processor. Why? Cost. Cost is one of the biggest concerns for home users nowdays. Pentiums are far too expensive compared to AMD or Celeron processors.

As for Celerons in a server... unless you want a server of any kind to not run at its full potential (such as a small file server), do not even bother with a Pentium, also due to the above mentioned. The two files servers I currently run are both running Celeron processors because of the fact that I DO NOT need anything more than that.

i belong to the hardware enthusiast community, so naturally i do hate celerons, along with all other low-end chips. this does not put me in a position of bias, but rather at an advantage

You're a Republican, aren't you... First off, just because you're part of a hardware enthusiast group, it in no ways entails that you are a know-it-all, or smarter than anyone else on this board, so you've made yourself to sound. Second, your "natural" hatred of all low-end chips due to your envolvement in the enthusiast group would make you bias.

The information on this forum is purely opinion for the most part. Blaming us for your friends bad fortune with any system or hardware is not really a good way to go, heck, he should have asked you for advice. One computer being outperformed by another has many factors involved with it; Processor speed, Bus speed, Memory amount/type, to name a few.

but with the case of the celeron, there are better CPUs for less money.

Can you name a few?

 

[ANMMark]

you go find me a page on intel.com site where it's clearly stated that pentium 4 CPUs run at half the CPU's clock speed. which obviously won't be stated anywhere on the site because that simply doesnt make any sense.

You're right. It's not stated anywhere...except here:
http://developer.intel.com/design/Pentium4/prodbref/

and here:
http://www.cpuscorecard.com/cpufaqs/sep99c.htm

Plenty more, but I haven't the time to spend arguing this case. So, I'm hoping you understand the comparison chart, and article in the two that I'm giving you.

You may notice that the one link IS IN FACT Intell's site.

 

[server38]

Mark, is this what you were refering to?:

1066MHz, 800 MHz, 533 MHz or 400 MHz System Bus
In the Pentium 4 processor with 1066 MHz system bus, the bus supports high performance by delivering up to 8.5 GB of data-per-second into and out of the processor. This is accomplished through a physical signaling scheme of quad-pumping the data transfers over a 266 MHz clocked system bus and a buffering scheme allowing for sustained 1066 MHz data transfers. The same quad-pumping of data is true for Pentium 4 processors with 800 MHz system bus (6.4 GB data-per-second with a 200 MHz clocked system bus), 533 MHz system bus (4.2 GB data-per-second with a 133 MHz clocked system bus) and 400 MHz system bus (3.2 GB data-per-second with a 100 MHz clocked system bus). This compares to 1.06 GB/s delivered on the Pentium® III processor's 133 MHz system bus.

Most processors have more potential than they are said to have, this is typically how overclocking is done.

 

[Exon]

Why do people overclock? If you want your system to run at that speed - save up and buy a system that runs at that speed.

 

[server38]

I agree. I never really understood the "need" for overclocking, aside from testing what the processor is truely capable of. But namely, there is too much risk involved with overclocking a processor (if one does not know what one is doing).

 

[lebstar]

i go with pentium

 

[pmhoran]

I am really appreciating this thread ... and ALL the views expressed.

I haven't ... yet ... invested in "my own" web server ... but I have had experiences with Pentiums, Celerons and Dell computers.

Personally, no matter if its for a desktop, laptop or a server ... I will NEVER go with a Celeron again. My current desktop is a Celeron (from COMPAQ) and I have not been overly "pleased" with it since shortly after day one. If I had the $$ I would have invested in a Pentium again ... right away. I had Pentiums previous and will return to them when this desktop finally "implodes" and I have to replace it. Even with just the relatively simple stuff I do I noticed my old Pentium processed & compiled things a whole lot better than the new Celeron.

But you can be danged sure ... no matter what I read or where I read it ... before I buy my next computer I am going to do my own research and decide which kind of system will best suit my needs. I did not do that with my last purchase ... and you can danged sure THAT will never happen again.

I bought my first computer in 94 ... did months of research and had the thing built exactly to the specs I chose. It was "state of the art" at the time and cost me over $5000. But even 3 or 4 years later is was still considered a great computer compared to what was then being sold off the shelf.

But that could never happen these days. When I bought this computer ... it was pretty good specs when I bought it ... but within a few short weeks it was considered a "dinosaur". Technology is progressing in leaps & bounds these days ... far too fast for this old guy to keep up.

As for Dell's ... the people who have them as desktops that I know tend to either love them or hate them. It seems the ones who just want to do simple stuff on the computer and remain "clueless" about the inner workings or how the PC actually works are the ones who love them and the Dell support they got. Everyone I know who really get into games or intensive programming stuff hate the Dell's.

Just my uneducated 2 cents worth
Peter

 

[ldcdc]

before I buy my next computer I am going to do my own research and decide which kind of system will best suit my needs.

I totally recommend doing that. I have yet to be unhappy with a decision I made after proper research.

I'm totally satisfied with my current computer, which is not brand name, nor high-end. Dell, Compaq, HP systems are almost never bought by individuals where I live. Anyway, I think I spent over 40 hours of searching and reading, until I practically learned the reviews I was reading and rereading. Yes, I'm a research freak. I have recently spent over 20 hours just to decide on a sound card. After a while I was researching just to reinforce my already made decision.

So, before you buy, research thoroughly.