Home

News

Forums

Hardware

CPUs

Motherboards

Video

Guides

CPU Prices

RAM Prices

Compare Prices



Sharky Extreme : CPU Reviews & Articles March 11, 2010





Be a Marketplace Partner








 Advertising Info

About the Double-Underlined Links



 - Most Active Threads
 - Technical Support
 - CPUs & Overclocking



Latest News


- SanDisk's SSD As Rapid As It Is Reliable
- OCZ Launches Limited-Edition SSD
- AMD Offers Low-Profile DirectX 11 Graphics Card
- Microsoft Gaming Keyboard Has Awesome Anti-Ghosting
- Matrox Lets Multi-Monitor Fans Double Up
News Archives

Features

- SharkyExtreme.com: Interview with Microsoft's Dan Odell
- SharkyExtreme.com: Interview with ATI's Terry Makedon
- SharkyExtreme.com: Interview with Seagate's Joni Clark
- Half-Life 2 Review
- DOOM 3 Review

Buyer's Guides

- February High-end Gaming PC Buyer's Guide
- November Value Gaming PC Buyer's Guide
- September Extreme Gaming PC Buyer's Guide

HARDWARE

  • CPUs


  • Motherboards


  • Video Cards


    internet.commerce
    Be a Commerce Partner














    internet.com
    IT
    Developer
    Internet News
    Small Business
    Personal Technology

    Search internet.com
    Advertise
    Corporate Info
    Newsletters
    Tech Jobs
    E-mail Offers



  •   


    Intel Celeron 2.0 GHz Review
    By Ryan "Speedy" Wissman :  November 8, 2002

    PCMark 2002 Pro Performance

    PCMark 2002 Pro is an intriguing system benchmark, as it relates more to a more generic computer application usage pattern. Instead of relying on synthetic scores or actual business applications, it cuts a swath between the two methodologies. PCMark 2002 Pro performs CPU tasks such as image compression, text search and audio conversion, while combining this with a selection of similar benchmarks for memory, hard drive and video components. As we are dealing specifically with processors, the two portions we tested are the CPU and Memory benchmarks.

    In the CPU test, the Celeron 2.0 GHz more than holds its own against the competition, and the overclocked Celeron even manages to pull ahead with a score of 6762.

    In the memory test the Celeron 2.0 GHz once again falls back a bit, but at 3.0 GHz, it actually takes the performance lead over both the Intel and AMD competition.

    3DMark 2001SE Pro 32-bit Performance

    MadOnion's 3DMark 2001SE is a very popular 3D benchmark tool, and assuming the video card and driver revision is kept absolutely consistent, then it can be a good system/CPU test as well. 3DMark 2001SE also fills the dual role of doing some idea as to which processor may be the best fit for upcoming DirectX 8.X games. Benchmark testing was performed at the default setting of 1024x768, 32-bit color/textures, and Pure Hardware T&L support.

    Once we enter 3D game territory, the Celeron begins to show its weaknesses. Even at 3 GHz the Celeron gets beaten by "slower" Northwood Pentium 4 chips, though it does surpass the older 256K Pentium 4-1.6 and 1.8 GHz. In the AMD comparison, the Celeron at 3.0GHz scores about 100 points less than the Athlon XP 1900+.



    Page 1 Introduction
    Page 2 Performance and Test Systems
  • Page 3 PCMark 2002 and 3DMark 2001SE Pro Performance
    Page 4 Quake 3, Jedi Knight II & Comanche 4 Performance
    Page 5 Return to Castle Wolfenstein & UT 2003 Performance
    Page 6 Benchmark Analysis, Value and Conclusion


    Copyright(c) 2010 QuinStreet Inc. All Rights Reserved. Legal Notices | Licensing , Reprints , & Permissions | Privacy Policy



    The Network for Technology Professionals

    Search:

    About Internet.com

    Legal Notices, Licensing, Permissions, Privacy Policy.
    Advertise | Newsletters | E-mail Offers