Celeron D 3.2Ghz vs. Pentium 4 2.8Ghz

This topic is locked from further discussion.

#1 Posted by pknyo (214 posts) -
Can somebody tell me whats better a Celeron d @ 3.2Ghz or a Pentium 4 @ 2.8Ghz. Its not for gaming at all, I have my gaming computer with a c2d e4400 @ 3.0ghz sli 8800gs`s Oced etc, etc... I`m upgrading my parents computer for em now since I just got some new ram and I have an old eMachines I bought last and stripped down a lil. I started upgrading the eMachine then got into the whole Pc gaming thing and ended up building a new computer and was left with a computer minus a hard drive and ram. Now i got the ram so I`m going to give it to my folks, My sister sent my parents there old work computer last yeear when their company upgrading theirs. Its a Compaq with a Petium 4 processor and the eMachines haS The Celeron. The Compaq however has a mobo with AGP graphics and DDR1 memory. The eMachine has PCIe graphics and DDR2 memory. The Compaq is running Vista Premium at a crawl ( I got Vista thinking it would be better than Xp cause it was supposed to the latest and graetest without reading the reviews) I will be putting my ol;d 8600gt in the eMachines, but I was wondering if I should put the P4 in there ( if it is compatible with the mobo, i still have to check). I think I remember the Pentium 4s were the top of the line processors and the celeron were the budget processors, in fact last year when I bought my computer ( bargain basement $270 @ tigerdirect) there were computers with pentium 4s selling for $50-$100 more. So I ask which is better and do they both use the same socket?
#2 Posted by boogernator (205 posts) -
#3 Posted by KurganUK23 (482 posts) -
Well the P4 is probably the better cpu even considering the gap in raw power but as the Celeron D has better mobo capability and its not for gaming, if you have some spare stuff that will fit into the Celeron board id go with that, it shouldn't make much difference cpu wise and the increase in ram and graphics would be better.
#4 Posted by kemar7856 (11506 posts) -
celerons are intel's low end cards
#5 Posted by swehunt (3637 posts) -

I have no clue about what the awnsers you got telling you.

The Celeron D is a dual CPU, and have the same architecture as the P4 so why in h*ck would the singlecore at a lower clock be faster?

The Celeron would be a fair bit faster is my bet!

#6 Posted by opamando (1268 posts) -

I have no clue about what the awnsers you got telling you.

The Celeron D is a dual CPU, and have the same architecture as the P4 so why in h*ck would the singlecore at a lower clock be faster?

The Celeron would be a fair bit faster is my bet!

swehunt
The Celeron D is not a dual core CPU. Celeron's have always been single core, up until the most recent E1200, E1400, which are dual cores. While I am not sure, I would put my money on the P4 being better than that old stick of celery.
#7 Posted by swehunt (3637 posts) -
[QUOTE="swehunt"]

I have no clue about what the awnsers you got telling you.

The Celeron D is a dual CPU, and have the same architecture as the P4 so why in h*ck would the singlecore at a lower clock be faster?

The Celeron would be a fair bit faster is my bet!

opamando
The Celeron D is not a dual core CPU. Celeron's have always been single core, up until the most recent E1200, E1400, which are dual cores. While I am not sure, I would put my money on the P4 being better than that old stick of celery.

I stand corrected. :D You are rigth mister, i wasn't thinking at the moment when i replyed. The P4 is about 15-20% faster clock per clock in most apps due to the larger cache versus Celeron. I thougth the D was the dualcore, but i was mistaking. It's just as opmando saying. TC: And furthermore we should make clear if we are talking about a P4 Prescot with 1mb cache? Or is it the old northwood? they don't have to much simularity, the first have hyperthreading and a shrinken diesize. the old is a 130nm old champ with half the cache memory and slower frontbus-speed.