From: Vincent Poy (vince_at_pele.WURLDLINK.NET)
Date: Sat Jun 22 2002 - 03:59:03 EDT
Well, you don't need a new motherboard since there are two ways to
do it. If you had a slot 1 motherboard, you can use a Leapfrog adapter
which comes with a Celeron 1.2Ghz CPU for $179. Or you can simply short
two of the pins on the Tulatin CPU and use it on a older motherboard.
Cheers,
Vince - vince_at_WURLDLINK.NET - Vice President ________ __ ____
Unix Networking Operations - FreeBSD-Real Unix for Free / / / / | / |[__ ]
WurldLink Corporation / / / / | / | __] ]
San Francisco - Honolulu - Hong Kong / / / / / |/ / | __] ]
HongKong Stars/Gravis UltraSound Mailing Lists Admin /_/_/_/_/|___/|_|[____]
Almighty1_at_IRC - oahu.DAL.NET Hawaii's DALnet IRC Network Server Admin
On Fri, 14 Jun 2002, Bruce Markowitz wrote:
> 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