From: Cottrell, Eric (ecottrell_at_doble.com)
Date: Mon Jun 24 2002 - 10:27:30 EDT
Hello,
Powerleap (http://www.powerleap.com) has all sorts of adapters.
They have both slot one and PGA-370 adapters that allow a
tualatin Celeron or P3 to be used in older motherboards. The systems
we had could not do 133 FSB so it made sense to go with the
Celeron. There was also good info on the net about upgrading
the Dell Dimension TPS_X computers we have. The adapter
has it's own VRM (Voltage Regulator Module) and converts the
changed signalling. So far the only dealer I found that
sells the slot one adapter sans a processor is PCs for Everyone
(http://www.pcsforeveryone.com).
It would be great if someone made an adapter for Thinkpads but
with the lack of space I doubt anyone could do it. The MMC
modules were a good idea but it appears that the changing
feature set (Form Factor/FSB/SpeedStep) and no doubt BIOS
limitations has not made it practical for big speed improvements.
What amazes me is the price overlaps of processors. It was
cheaper for me to get a 1.3 GHz Celeron ($90) and the adapter ($40)
than to get a 850 MHz P3 Slot One 100 FSB processor ($190). The
850 MHz P3 Slot One 133 FSB processor is cheaper, and PGA370 stuff
still cheaper. Also it seems the P4s in the same clock range are
about the same price as the P3s. I did the research and it still
amazes me (and my boss) that you can boost the performance of
some old desktops inexpensively. Too bad you can not do it with
notebooks as easily.
73 Eric ecottrell_at_doble.com WB1HBU
-----Original Message-----
From: Bruce Markowitz [mailto:scosgt_at_worldnet.att.net]
Sent: Friday, June 14, 2002 7:27 PM
To: Cottrell, Eric; 'shamanjp'; Thinkpad List
Subject: Re: A 30p faster than A 31 in July PC World?
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