From: Bruce Markowitz (scosgt_at_worldnet.att.net)
Date: Fri Jun 14 2002 - 20:26:51 EDT
Now a question:
I thought the Celerons above one gig needed a motherboard that is compatible
ith the Tulatin chip?
But you said that you replaced 550Mhz chips. How can that Mobo be new enough
to support that chip?
I have some IBM 300PL's (100FSB) that I have upgraded to P3 1Ghz and Celeron
1 gig, but the P3 1.1 gig would not work properly, and I assumed that the
new Celerons (with the 256K cache) 1.2 and 1.3 would not work on this mobo.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Cottrell, Eric" <ecottrell_at_doble.com>
To: "'shamanjp'" <shamanjp_at_prodigy.net>; "Thinkpad List"
<thinkpad_at_cs.utk.edu>
Sent: Friday, June 21, 2002 6:31 PM
Subject: RE: A 30p faster than A 31 in July PC World?
> Hello,
>
> Looking at the tabook it seems the A30p uses a video chip with a faster
> clock 8->.
> Remember that CPU speed is only part of the equation. The differences
> between
> benchmark numbers will depend on the benchmark as well. The speedstep
> feature
> can make a difference. Unfortunely I am not aware of the differences
> between
> the Mobile versions of the processors.
>
> The discussions I have seen indicate that P4 processors using SDRAM run
> slower than
> the newer Tualatin P3 when both are at the same clock speed. 1.4 GHz P4 =
> 1.2 GHz P3.
> So I wonder if the difference due to the higher clock is only 14% instead
of
> 33%.
>
> Even the newer Celerons using the Tualatin core (100 MHz FSB) work pretty
> well. I
> bought an adapter and replaced some slot 1 550 MHz P3 processors with 1.3
> GHz Celerons.
> It halfed compile times on a massive software project. The 1.3 GHz
Celeron
> has half
> the cache of a 1.3 GHz P3 but this is the same amount as a 550 MHz P3.
The
> compile
> times with the 1.3 GHz Celeron (100 FSB) are the same as a 1 GHz P3 (133
> FSB).
>
> No doubt there are applications where the P4 is faster than the P3. It
> seems for the
> general user there is no great difference between the Celeron, P3 or P4 in
> the same
> clock range. I also tend not to notice a task going from 4 seconds down
to
> 2 seconds
> compared to a task going from 40 seconds down to 20 seconds 8->. I
believe
> there
> is a point (about 300 MHz P2/P3) where a computer will still work great
for
> general
> tasks. That is why I still use my 366 MHz TP600e.
>
> 73 Eric ecottrell_at_doble.com WB1HBU
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: shamanjp [mailto:shamanjp_at_prodigy.net]
> Sent: Friday, June 21, 2002 4:44 PM
> To: Thinkpad List
> Subject: A 30p faster than A 31 in July PC World?
>
>
> Why would a P3-M 1.2GHz A30p be so much faster than a new P4-M 1.6GHz A31?
>
> In the top 15 notebook PC's section of the magazine,
>
> PC WorldBench 4 Performance results
> A30p= 113 Outstanding
> A31= 90 Average
>
> Is it XP vs 2000? The hard drive? Actually none of the P4 machines did
very
> well compared to the P3's.
> Interesting...
> Jerry
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.3 : Thu Jan 23 2003 - 09:59:01 EST