Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Jim McMannis who wrote (36590)	9/1/1998 5:28:00 AM
From: Tenchusatsu	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1572090

Jim, All tests I see show the Celeron A is as fast or faster than the Pentium II at the same clock speed. Of course Intel doesn't want you to know this...they call it market segmentation. As I recall, the Mendocino Celeron is indeed slower than the Pentium II when clocked regularly (i.e. 66 MHz bus). Sure you can push the Mendocino Celeron to 450 MHz and beat the Pentium II 450 MHz, but I wouldn't trust such a chip except to play some games. (On second thought, I wouldn't want my game to crash in the middle of save points. I'm playing Final Fantasy VII right now, and the time between save points can easily reach an hour or more.) If you think about things from a technical perspective, it makes sense that the Mendocino Celeron would be faster than an equivalent Pentium II with the 100 MHz bus, as opposed to the 66 MHz bus. Because the Celeron's L2 cache is smaller, there's going to be more front-side bus traffic than the Pentium II. So you can imagine that increasing the speed of the front-side bus is going to be better for the Celeron than for the Pentium II. Tenchusatsu