I saw gamedude website this morning. intel prices got drop now

p3 1000 is $599


and New Celeron 800 with 100 FSB is $299

www.gamedude.com.au

Gamedude RULEZ!

Conrode SUCK!

For another $10 over the Celery you can get a Tbird 900. That would flog the Celery into submission.

The 900 Tbird is even cheaper than the PIII 667! Intel sux0rs. :)

but motherboards are more expensive

and they are gay as well

I've had no problems with my Asus K7V, other than having to replace viaagp.sys when installing win2k.

And I tell you what - my Athlon 700 feels MUCH faster than the PIII 650 I'm on here at work. This pc needs a bit more ram, though, but in dcypher.net my computer s***s on this from a great height (showing the strength of the Athlon FPU)

Pity I don't have some flavour of Geforce 2. :(

i can plug an intel cpu into my motherboard and overclock it without f***ing around with a pencil

can't do that with a k7v

you wouldnt use a pencil on a k7v either.. they are for Slot A Athlons, not socket A ones that you are thinking of..

so does it support overclocking in the bios?

Yeah, but only fsb.

sif I need to overclock, though. That's why I still have my celery 300A around - to satisfy my overclocking desires. :)

Hey, rumour has it that AMD are releasing a 1.3GHz Athlon on Monday. =)

neff: almost all Athlon mobos support FSB overclocking..

the pencil trick you are talking about is used on Socket A AMD CPUs to unlock the multiplier, making overclocking alot easier.

I'd like to see you unlock the mulitplier on one of your intel CPUs

Ineff you d******* Athlon motherboards overclock just the same as Intel ones. Even my dark ages K7M has bios FSB adjustment. In a totally elite fashion I clocked my 650 at a staggering 700 - 50 mhz muthaf***a!!! :P

AMD is clearly the better solution right now. The mobos for an AMD cost < $100 more; the CPU's are both better performing and far cheaper.

I've bought Intel all my life, but AMD is simply owning Intel right now. Absolutely owning.

i'm perfectly happy with my celeron 800 and be6-2

all these 1ghz computers are just for show

Quote Ineff:

sif a p3 1ghz wouldnt be sweet

heh.. owned

neff got slammed

i was quoted out of context damn you :)

Hahaha suck it ineff :)

Celerons = gay to the max.

Just because they cain your piece of s*** processor for half the price =P

Hmm.... abit vp6 mobo with dual celery 800's

I WANT IT!!!!!!

Sifff that would be s***... Celerons are gay man face it. Look at the benchmarks - if you spend more you won't get such a high clock frequency but you will get tonnes better performance.

But the thing is that the Celerons are more expensive than Thunderbirds!!!

Celeron 800 (100fsb) - $299
Duron 800 - $179
Thunderbird 800 - $249

I don't care if the mobo's are more expensive - that's cancelled out by the difference in price of equivalently clocked chips.

And the crazy part is that a Celeron 800 matches the performance of a Duron 600!!!

Hehe its pretty gay huh? Sif Intel aren't f***ed up the ass.

sif they aren't

The reason Athlon motherboards are more expensive than P3 boards is becuase there is no such thing as a "low end" Athlon motherboard. All KT133 boards are in the same sort of class as a 694X and in most cases an i815e.

how do u unlock the amd multiplier wif a pencil?

to change the clock multiplier wif a pencil, u have draw line between the cache chip on top of the cpu. the lead or graphite acts as a path between the cache allowing faster speeds

you're lucky you said graphite dark....

the next person who says a pencil has lead in it gets slapped

Read this item on the Ars Technica forum and pray that you don't kill as many chips as this poor guy...

And you're not creating paths between cache, it's basically like in the old Socket 7 days of dip switches or jumpers on the motherboard, only you draw the connection in on the bridges on top of the processor.

There's two sets of bridges - one is to set the multiplier, and the other is the maximum multiplier that the chip will let you use. Setting the multiplier higher than the chip will allow will have no effect.

Read up before doing any of it, because there are other bridges on the chip and I can't remember their use. Check Tom's Hardware Guide, HardOCP, AthlonOC.com, etc, etc, for full info.

Speaking of the T-Bird, i just got a new 1.2K, with A7V MB the other day, and it freezes every 5 minutes. I can't even get a proper install of Q3 going!!!
Does anyone know whats causing this or are AMDs really that unstable?

No AMD are not that unstable. If you want help you should list what OS you are running and things like that - it is difficult to help otherwise. Could be a million things.

Thanks. I wanna get it fixed by the lan, or my brother won't be able to come (i'll be using the old computer).
I'm using win 98 (original) and just installed the Asus driver, SB Live! and Gigabyte GeForce2 GTS stuff.
It sometimes freezes on the OS installation tho (i've formated about 5 times in the last 4 days, because installations keep stuffing up my system when they don't finnish.

Hmm that is very strange.. could it be an IRQ problem?

I'm planning on phoning GameDude (best shop there is) tomorrow (damn today for being a holliday) anyway, to see what they can do.
I usually happens when i'm trying to write a big file to the HD. From CD or Lan, but it dois freeze in the middle of running programs as well.

Well it sounds like your HDD then. Have you tried rearangin you IDE devices or just simply checking you cables are in correctly etc?

I've checked the cables, but haven't rearanged anything. My HD is in the the ATA100 slot and, for some reason, win2k can't see it!!
Ouch!!!!!!!
A quick look at my startup, and 4 devices have IRQ 9: Serial Bus Controller, SBC, Simple Comm controller and Multimedia device! Would that cause a problem?

too bad dark got it TOTALLY WRONG!

its got nothing to do with cache chips on the CPU (because there isnt any, its on the die)

you have to use a pencil to close the L1 bridges on the CPU. early socket A athlons/durons had these bridges connected, but then AMD started locking the multipliers buy cutting these bridges.

drawing a pencil line across them simply re-joins them again and unlocks your multiplier

what's your cpu temp?

we send back a s***load of amd chips on warranty due to overheating. these babies do can cook themselves stupid.

while it is true that amd chips are far better bang fer yer buck, i still maintain that the quality of Intel cpu's are of a higher calibre

you get what you pay for...

/me pats my new p3 1000

52 to 53
my friend says that thats hot, but i got a $50 fan and it still froze when i underclocked down to 600Mhz

did you install all the latest VIA drivers after you installed your OS?

great - another ra to add to the list :P

I got the VIA integreated 4in1 v4.24(2) (sorry, but my last PC was a Gateway, meaning i've never had any problems which weren't fixed with a quick call, or a reinsta;;, using the system disk.

RA, List? now i'm confused

who installed the heatsink? you might wanna make sure its sitting nice and flat on the CPU...

ra = return authority

I have an A7V so I can help u out :)
Put the HDD on the VIA ATA/66 controller (not the promise ATA/100) and then install Win98 (preferably Second Edition). Then, install Via 4-in-1 4.25(a) and then the Promise controller's driver. Then put the drive on the ATA/100 controller. BANG it all works fine :D :D
I had a problem like that once when i used WinME on my system (a period of about 5 days before it fuct up beyond repair). Now I use Windows 2000 and it is all sweet as.
Also just so u know, underclocking can do just as much damage to a processor as overclocking can.

Umm wouldn't what he said about 4 devices on the same IRQ be a problem???

Nar, 4 Devices on the 1 IRQ isn't good.. like, its slower than each device on its own IRQ, but Basically every PCI device which comes out now days supports IRQ sharing, and if your system is ACPI complient, you'll be fine.

Einstein: You can't use Celeron2s (AKA Celerons with the Coppermine128 Core.. the FC-PGA ones.. anything above and including 566 and some 533s) in Dual mode. They don't support SMP. It was disabled by intel.. and so far no one has figured out any way to re-enable it. I doubt they will.

rubber_band: hah! I would -really- like to know where you heard that Underclocking can damage a processer. If it did, Intel, AMD, Via, all the other Chip manufacturers, would be selling chips which are damaging themselves. How do you think Overclocking works, hrmm? Its all about bin sorting.. if there is more demand for a P3 800 over a P3 1000, all they do is change the multiplier from 7.5/10 to 6/8, test it, and there ya go. Also, if there is more demand for a celeron 633 over a p3 of some kind, they could just disable Half the Level 2 cache, change the multiplier, and there you have a celeron. Sure, it might have been able to run as a p3, but people didn't want it as a p3. They wouldn't do that with a P3 most of the time though. Celerons2s are just p3s with half the level 2 cache not working... probably due to bad yields on the p3s (dodgy Intel, Dodgy P6).

Overvolting is dangerous. Overclocking is dangerous. How dangerous it really is seems to be a matter of opinion though, but the bottom line is that it shortens a processor's life. If a processor (take for example a 1GHz Thunderbird) is designed to run on 1.75v, and then it is run at 700MHz on the same voltage (whereas a TBird 700 runs on 1.7v) it would effectively be overvolting a processor. But, also, undervolting AND underclocking together can be even more dangerous.

i wish i knew how to overclock then i could try on this computer. mabye get rid of my 10fps..

btw...

wtf is with the via 4.25 drivers?
on every mobo i try the cpu-to-agp driver never seems to set up.

this is especially so with our Soyo and Abit boards...
Asus a7v, and the pro run sweet... but the issue has me totally confused! Anyone here know anything about it?

get me a job at CA and i might help :O

Koopz: That was with the beta version of 4.25 from www.viahardware.com. The official 4.25(a) version from www.via.com.tw doesn't have that problem.

Yep, now you change your story.

I didn't change my story about anything did I?

anyone concerned about multiple devices sharing an irq can add this line to their system.ini file in windows

Irq5=4096

goes under [386Enh], adds a 4k buffer to that irq
doesnt have to be 4k either, u can use 1k if u want.
I found network cards love irq10, mines running small buffers on irqs 5,9,10


'monkey-man-gun(evolution)'

Intel 600@900 slaps down my duron700@950, nuff said. I have bought intel all my life, I thought I would give AMD a go. I would not go AMD again.

Celeron 600@900 or PIII 600@900?

I could understand it if it's a PIII, but not if it's a Celeron. Celerons are really suffering at the moment and I am not entirely sure why. I mean, at 100fsb they should be pretty good, but that doesn't seem evident from comparisons I've seen.

Okay, time for some pics to back things up a little... (source: http://www.hexus.net/review.php?review=132)

http://www.h-2k.co.uk/hexus/duron850/duron81.gif
http://www.h-2k.co.uk/hexus/duron850/duron82.gif
http://www.h-2k.co.uk/hexus/duron850/duron83.gif
http://www.h-2k.co.uk/hexus/duron850/duron84.gif

The celeron just isn't cutting it. Unfortunately they don't have any 100fsb celerons in this test by the looks of it... Will see if I can find some...

erm, cerb, i've built 2 celeron 600 systems for other ppl that were @900 mhz, 100fsb, standard voltage
benchmarked in sysoft sandra quicker than my p3-800
they were rock solid, and a major piss off, i paid $600 for my p3 chip, these guys were getting better performance with $200 chips

there's absolutely nothing wrong with celerons running at 100fsb, they're coppermine cores, and half the cache of the p3s doesnt seem to affect them

i'd still prefer a p3 850/100 then this c2 566@850

axe: This is only what I've read on the net. I haven't seen any celeron 2's yet, but from what I've seen there's not going to be as many of them as there are Durons and Athlons...

Here's another couple of pics, this time from Anandtech

http://images.anandtech.com/reviews/cpu/intel/celeron/800/image010.gif
http://images.anandtech.com/reviews/cpu/intel/celeron/800/image012.gif

From personal experience, I have an Athlon Classic 700 here at home, and a PIII 650 at work, and the PIII seems about 30-40% slower than my system.

And the fact that I've been clearly stating all along is that regardless of which is the better performer, the Celeron 2's are more expensive than both the Duron and the Thunderbird. Plus the Durons overclock just as well as the Celerons (in fact, it's better cause it can be done by adjusting the multiplier, so you don't have to worry about your AGP/PCI devices not liking it...)

Celeron 800 (100fsb) - $299
Duron 800 - $179
Thunderbird 800 - $249

I know what I'd prefer, especially given the graphs above...

AstroChode, what sort of Powersupply are you using? If it's anything under 300W, there's your trouble. Have a look at the recommended powersupplys for Athlons at http://www1.amd.com/athlon/power

you can paste as many pictures of durons getting higher fps, but the bottom line is this... With configs that are made for speed, durons just cant handle it.

I find with my A7V i have to run it at AGPx4 to be stable
in win2k it does AGPx4 Ok but if you try and run Diabl2 or Unreal tournie on win2k it chugs REAL bad for some reason so i stick to WinME

brassOnes: That's coz Diablo2 is the most poorly written game in history. I mean, how bad is it when you're the server and you lag out?!?!?! :)

shad: I use PC's more for work and photoshop than for games, and it's been my personal experience that AMD chips kick arse. Plus they are less expensive now (the extra expense on the mobo's is offset by the chips being cheaper).

Oh, and as far as reliablility goes: my Athlon has no problems whatsoever. Perhaps the occasional (ie, once a week or so) lock up when starting quake3, but nothing more than that.

Also, "configs made for speed"? When do you need to have a config made for speed if you've got a Duron running at over 1Ghz?

<rant>
One thing I find funny in the CPU debate is that AMD people (which I guess I am) will often go and buy an Intel processor if they are considerably better price/performance. Two years ago I was waiting for the K6-3 to come out (cause it sounded really promising) when I heard the price of Celeron 300a's and their overclockability. I promptly went out and bought one. But once I could afford an Athlon (7 months ago), I got one.

Whereas Intel people always stand firm to Intel, swearing blindly that everything else HAS to be crap because it's not Intel.

Why is it that Tom Pabst has been praising the performance of Intel for so many years (and quite rightly so) but now that he believes AMD has the upper hand, everyone says he's in AMD's pocket.

He also used to praise 3dfx long long ago...

Times change, and AMD is heading on a path that is fast putting them ahead of Intel, and yet there are people who still group AMD processors along with Cyrix chips!!!

Intel should be very, very scared of AMD now more than ever, as evidenced by the whole 1.13GHz PIII debacle. The PIII architecture (heh... read that as PII architecture, which can be read different, as well. :) has reached its limit, and they're taking over with new architecturein the P4 and it has yet to prove itself. The lack of software optimised for it (other than benchmark software) is it's achillies heel at the moment, as it's FPU sucks ass when not using SSE2 - it gets beaten by PIII's.

And yet the Athlon architecture is still going strong - just the other day I saw the WCPUID screenshot of a 1.2GHz Tbird running at 1.777GHz, with the assistance of some liquid nitrogen. :)

I am not saying that everyone should be using AMD's just because of my opinions. I am just saying that there's some people in the world who are not very open minded, even when they have hard facts laid out in front of them.

I am giving facts to back up my arguments here, yet I see no-one else doing the same. If you can show me proof of a Duron being beaten by a similarly clocked Celeron running a similar config, then I may reconsider my stance, but all evidence I've seen suggest that AMD has the performance title for the time being.

</rant>

Ok this is a test using te.cfg, one of the fastest playable configs around.

My computer
Duron 700@950
Geforce ddr
155 fps

Limps computer
Celeron2 600@900
Geforce ddr
221 fps

So very disapointed really.

Shad, linkage to that config? lyco@optushome.com.au please? :)

Looks like u havent set up ur computer properly then shad...

shad: saying you are very disappointed doesn't tell us anything.

How much ram did each pc have. What bus speed and cas latency was the ram running at. What os were each running? What Mobo chipset in each one? what drivers for the hardware was it using?

In every test done (bar maybe 1 or 2), the Duron slaps the Celeron down at equal speeds. I used to be an Intel person. I got changed to AMD, just because the performance is better, as is the price. Im not saying this just because I own an AMD system. Im saying this because its fact.

If you were talking about P3s and TBirds, my approach is different. They both offer pretty much the same performance, at pretty much the same price.. with the TBird coming in at way cheaper for the higher speeds (Mobo + CPU.. Mobo for p3 cheap, P3 expensive.. Mobo for TBird Expensive, TBird cheap). I would still rather a TBird.. I have a socket A mobo now. But if I had the money at the start and was going to choose.. I would probably go intel for lower speeds.. they put out less heat, and are quite overclockable. At higher speeds, TBird all the way.. they cost so much less that P3 equivalents. (another fact).

Oh well, up to you. I just hope you arn't saying this just because you like Intel over AMD.

My pc is an Athlon 700 with a Matrox G400 (Same speed as a TNT2) and in certain situations I can get 210 fps.

Quoting fps figures doesn't mean a lot. Are you running the same q3a config as Limps? Are you both on the same OS? Are you both using the same drivers? Are they the same Geforce boards? Do you both have ATA/100 drives? Is your ram running at 133? etc, etc, etc.

Sorry to be picky, but it just doesn't seem right to me that his is that much faster than yours. I'm assuming that's averages over a timedemo?

ahhh... I think I know what it could be.... Celeron 2's have SSE, right? That's probably the answer. Quake3 is about the only app that shows the power of the P4, too, and it's cause of SSE2 optimisations in Q3. But that still doesn't explain a 33% increase in performance...

Yeah it's funny how Durons still beat Celerons in Quake 3 benchmarks because Q3A supports SSE but not 3DNow! :)

Durons/Thunderbirds have incredibly kick-ass FPU's.

On Dcypher.net (distributed processing like Seti@home) my 700 does 20000 rays/sec and the PIII 650 at work does 13000 rays/sec. I've seen a Tbird 700 doing 21000 rays/sec (faster cache than mine. :(

te.cfg post your results and your computer specs

duron 700@950 9.5x100
160 megs of ram
asus geforce ddr pure
abit kt7
via 4in1 drivers 4.25a
155 fps

Athlon Classic 700 (not o/c)
192Mb RAM
Matrox G400 DualHead 32Mb
Asus K7V
Not sure what via drivers
87fps - 1.27g
90fps - 1.27h

Should I have run it without sound enabled?

93fps now - didn't re-exec the config after installing 1.27h

Okay, ran with s_initsound 0 and got 108fps.

There's something wrong with your system, shad, if I'm getting 108fps on a fricking G400!!! (Not that I'm complaining, mind you :)

Just as a base benchmark, ie, my system is 1.5 Lyco's! :)

Celeron 466@466 :)
192Mb RAM
Abit BX6-2
v770 TNT2 Ultra
s_initsound 0
te.cfg

83.1 fps, averaged over about 10 test runs.

Dammit... mine's only 1.3 lycos... :(

I was running with sound on. And i have compared my duron with a lot of other duron users and its not that i havent set it up correctly.

Is ur RAM running on 100 or 133MHz ?

100 mhz

cel 566@1050
geforce 2MX
128mb ram
aopen ax6bcpro
with my config i get 160 fps..

with the default q3 high quality one i get somethin like 90 or so..

s_initsound 0

I was just wondering what diference this command makes? cause It didn't seem to effect the fps in any way

I got 15fps higher without sound... 16% increase in performance.