Home

News

Forums

Hardware

CPUs

Motherboards

Video

Guides

CPU Prices

RAM Prices

Compare Prices



Sharky Extreme : CPU Reviews & Articles March 14, 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

    Return to Castle Wolfenstein Performance

    Return to Castle Wolfenstein is another Quake-based game, but with some notable differences. The basic game engine may be the same, but the graphics, gameplay and stress it puts on a processor are very different. Until the next Quake game appears, RtCW is the next best way to determine high-end Quake engine performance. We have used the Checkpoint MP demo using the default High Quality detail settings and have increased the resolution to 1024x768.

    In this benchmark the Celeron performed much better than it did in Comanche 4. The Celeron 2.0 GHz is able to score a little higher than our two low-end Athlon XP chips without overclocking. Return to Castle Wolfenstein is still a Quake 3 Arena-based game, and is a benchmark where the Pentium 4-based chips to considerably better than AMD's Athlon XP processors.

    Unreal Tournament 2003 Demo Performance

    The Unreal Tournament 2003 Demo includes a benchmark program that automatically tests two separate modes. One is Flyby, which takes a canned tour of the UT game world and then offers up a frame rate score and really hammers both the CPU and video card. The second is Botmatch, and this is a more game-based benchmark than Flyby, and is a far more CPU-oriented test. In this section, we've run Unreal Tournament 2003 at 1024x768 x 32-bit.

    In UT 2003 Flyby testing, the Celeron again takes a backseat to the Athlon XP 1900+ and Pentium 4, but when the overclocking gloves come off, it's able to reach the same approximate performance as a Pentium 4-1.8 GHz (256K).

    The Botmatch test raises the CPU bar quite significantly, and here the Celeron is not able to beat even the Athlon XP 1600+, either at standard or 3.0 GHz overclocked speeds. The UT 2003 Botmatch test is able to expose weaknesses in any CPU, and with only a 128K of L2 cache the Celeron paints a big target.



    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