Debunkify: Celerons

[hat]

Hm... people seem to like the idea "Oh those Celerons are only broken Pentiums." The "broken"ness of the Celeron is some of the L2 cache being disabled because it doesn't work properly. So they brand them Celeron and sell them for cheap for companies to buy in mass quantities for their offices.

So how come we don't see any dual core celerons? Something along the lines of Core 2 Celeron ?? I would say Celeron D, but that is already taken, and they aren't dual core (Pentium D).

??

[wazzledoozle]

Pentium is the new Celeron brand. Core 2's with 1mb of L2, you can already find them in laptops.

[hat]

Pentiums are Pentiums, Celerons are Celerons. And when I get my Pentium D 2.8, I am going to be damn proud of it! Sucks that they use netburst though, but my proc will have 2x2MB L2 so no biggie

[Glitched System]

Is it a 820?

[hat]

The pentium D is going to be a 915 Presler 2.8GHz, it's got 800MHz FSB along with a nice chunk of L2: 2x2

[Sasqui]

The older single core celerys were a HUGE price point above pentiums - I'm talking the days of the PIII. Celerys have always been "hobbled" pentiums, but some of the average ones were cheaper and more powerful than low end pentiums, especially if you were into overclocking. In the Core2 world, I consider the E4300 to be a celeron.

[hat]

It's not a celeron unless it says celeron :/ ??

**a side note: How do you think a pentium d 2.8 presler core, 2x2MB L2 cache, would stand up to a c2d E4300?

[Sasqui]

It's not a celeron unless it says celeron :/ ??

**a side note: How do you think a pentium d 2.8 presler core, 2x2MB L2 cache, would stand up to a c2d E4300?

Yea, I guess what I'm saying is learn from what intel does and not what they say (umm... "celeron" :)). afaik, there is no C2 celeron - the E4300 is sure priced and positioned like one. Even the name is low end, but the potential huge.

At stock, I'd say close, but if you overclocked an E4300 even to 2.5 Ghz, it would trounce the presler 2.8 by about a factor of about 2. But then again, you can overclock each.

[tkpenalty]

E4300 set at 1066 (266) FSB would perform better than an E6300 mate, allendales are mainstream.

[Ketxxx]

C2D is more of an all-in-one. Pentiums wont be made for much longer, hence the introduction of CPUs such as the E4300. Given a little time I wouldnt be surprised to see an E4000 for office machines.

[Darren]

The pentium D is going to be a 915 Presler 2.8GHz, it's got 800MHz FSB along with a nice chunk of L2: 2x2

Glad to hear that you went the Pentium D route. Celerons Ds were good alternatives to Pentium 4's, especially if you are an overclocker.
I would love to see a Dual Core Celeron, and a Dual Core Sempron. But to be honest you can pick up an 6300 core 2 for soo cheap their is no market for Celerons. Just like there isn't a good market for Sempron because x2 3600-4600 is soo cheap it makes purchasing a budget single core pointless

[hat]

I figure why not get the Pentium D and the upgrader's motherboard with future features instead of a Pentium 4 Extreme I won't even have a HSF for.. heh
good deal

[Eric_Cartman]

the pentium name will live on with the e2x00 series also known as the pentium e series.

the celeron name will live on as the celeron 400 series.

both will be based of the core 2 duo cores(allendale and conroe), the pentium e series will have 1mb l2 and be dual core with 800mhz fsb, the celeron 400 series will be single core with 512kb of l2

rumor had it that there would be dual core celerons released to compete with the dual core semprons that amd promised us, but since we haven't seen any dual core semprons we probably won't see any dual core celerons

on a personal note: i hate celerons, they are slow, plain and simple. it is impossible to game on them, even when overclocked they bottleneck any decent mid-range card

[Eric_Cartman]

Glad to hear that you went the Pentium D route. Celerons Ds were good alternatives to Pentium 4's, especially if you are an overclocker.
I would love to see a Dual Core Celeron, and a Dual Core Sempron. But to be honest you can pick up an 6300 core 2 for soo cheap their is no market for Celerons. Just like there isn't a good market for Sempron because x2 3600-4600 is soo cheap it makes purchasing a budget single core pointless

schools and offices that buy thousands of computers for nothing more than basic office work are a great market for budget single core processors

i agree there really isn't a point for a single user to buy a single core budget processor, but if you are buying 1,000 computers and don't need the power of a dual core to do the job then even if the price difference is $10 in the end you save $10,000 just by going with the weaker single core and the job gets done just the same

[Darren]

Suppose

[KennyT772]

When I had a celeron I had no problems running it or bottlenecking my computer. The only difference is the cache in older celerons and cache/fsb for newer ones. When I upgraded my old system from a 2.7ghz celeron (27*100) to a p4 2.6 (26*100) I lost performance in every game. Even overclocked the Celeron would go to 3.5 and the northwood 2.9.

[keakar]

it's very simple really. if a pentium didn't meet the rated clock speeds at stock settings then it was renamed as a celeron. there was nothing wrong with it and many were tweaked by overclockers with great results. the whole point was intel had to guarrantee the clock speeds on the higher priced pentium it was selling to pc makers but wasn't giving the same promise about the celeron due to the price breaks. this is why the celerons were quickly labled inferier because they never seamed to perform to the speed ratings they were listed at. amd did the same thing with their chips but i can't remember the name of their second tier line.

the reason you don't see this anymore is because they can now make chips with such high quality control that the random underperforming chip is virtually no longer a reality.

[Eric_Cartman]

it's very simple really. if a pentium didn't meet the rated clock speeds at stock settings then it was renamed as a celeron. there was nothing wrong with it and many were tweaked by overclockers with great results. the whole point was intel had to guarrantee the clock speeds on the higher priced pentium it was selling to pc makers but wasn't giving the same promise about the celeron due to the price breaks. this is why the celerons were quickly labled inferier because they never seamed to perform to the speed ratings they were listed at. amd did the same thing with their chips but i can't remember the name of their second tier line.

the reason you don't see this anymore is because they can now make chips with such high quality control that the random underperforming chip is virtually no longer a reality.

there pretty much isn't a single thing right about that statement

there was usually something wrong with the celerons, they had sections of bad l2 cache, and hence it is disabled

intel had to guarantee the celerons run at their clock speeds too, just like the pentiums

and they are still doing it

[DanTheBanjoman]

schools and offices that buy thousands of computers for nothing more than basic office work are a great market for budget single core processors

i agree there really isn't a point for a single user to buy a single core budget processor, but if you are buying 1,000 computers and don't need the power of a dual core to do the job then even if the price difference is $10 in the end you save $10,000 just by going with the weaker single core and the job gets done just the same

However we're not talking about 10$, a Celeron can be bought for as little as €35 a piece. If you buy 1000 they're even cheaper. What does the cheapest C2D cost?

[JrRacinFan]

Ok, are y'all bashing on my "trailor park" budget comp?

I mean cmon, take a look at my sig, read my 3dmark scores, then see my comp specs.

Granted, I will upgrade to a C2D soon but not within the next 6 months. I am waiting for the quads to get even cheaper, and by cheaper I mean 185-220 USD range.

A celeron is a celeron, outbenched and outperformed by pentiums at stock speed, but when overclocked they overclock damn well. .:rant mode off:.

[Eric_Cartman]

that is my point, i just picked $10 as a very low example of how much a company can save

you can get celerons for $37 a piece, the cheapest dual core would be the 3600+ for $69. that is a price difference of $32, so if you are buying 1,000 you save $32,000 by going with a cheap single core and the office workers will probably never notice the difference

[keakar]

Quote Eric_Cartman [there pretty much isn't a single thing right about that statement

there was usually something wrong with the celerons, they had sections of bad l2 cache, and hence it is disabled

intel had to guarantee the celerons run at their clock speeds too, just like the pentiums

and they are still doing it ]


ok so it is the cache not the clock speeds that were inferior.

i do know for a fact that a celeron 2.4ghz can't run anywhere near a pentium 2.4ghz

if you want a comparable speed CPU it would take a 3.0ghz celeron to equal 1.5ghz pentium speeds

as long as you are not overclocking it. i know this from personal testing

[KennyT772]

speed = clockspeed idiot. celeron's have less cache and in some cases lower fsb's. they have the same instructions per clock, same memory bandwidth (with same fsbs of course), same die.

by the way a 3.0ghz celeron kills a 2.8ghz p4....

[keakar]

speed = clockspeed idiot. celeron's have less cache and in some cases lower fsb's. they have the same instructions per clock, same memory bandwidth (with same fsbs of course), same die.

by the way a 3.0ghz celeron kills a 2.8ghz p4....


i was giving cartman the benefit of the doubt that i could be wrong so i accepted
his viewpoint but your language only confirms your immature and have no manners.

stupid = your comment [QUOTE] by the way a 3.0ghz celeron kills a 2.8ghz p4]

as i already stated, this is only true if overclocking it.

otherwise why would they sell at half the price of the p4?

or maybe intel just didn't like making money so they were being nice.

[hat]

The socket 775 celerons are actually pretty good: the cedar mill ones anyway. On Newegg, the cedar mills get 512KB, the lowly prescotts get 256KB. I can live with 512KB L2 and a 3.20GHz clock.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819112211

[JrRacinFan]

Exactly my point being hat.

See my specs.

[Solaris17]

or we could argue in a more constructive way without being edgy with each other? that is unless youd like to see me get irritated?

[newtekie1]

The Cedar Mill Celeron Ds are great budget chips(see sig). 4.4GHz 24/7 on a stock Intel Cooler is pretty damn impressive and 512KB L2 is enough to make them very quick even at stock speeds. That is more or equal to the amount of L2 P4s had at times. A 3.06GHz Cedar Mill Celeron D actually outperforms a 3.06GHz Northwood P4 because the Cedar Mill Celeron D has better memory bandwidth even with the same FSB speed.

Plus because of their disabled L2 they use less power and put out less heat.

They also overclock beyond anything a P4 can do. You aren't going to get a Cedar Mill P4 up to 4.4GHz on a stock intel cooler, chances of you even hitting 4GHz is pretty slim even with a decent 3rd party air cooler.

The fact of the matter is there isn't a Pentium 4 on air around that can touch my Celeron D regardless of the Pentiums clock speeds, the Celeron D performs a hell of a lot better than a 2.2GHz P4 which is what most seem to think it should be rated at as most seem to think you just take the clock speed and divide my 2. That isn't true anymore, and hasn't been for several years.

Then of course there is the Celeron Ms, which I'm not even getting into. Lets just say that back when I had a golden Opteron 148@3GHz I would have traded it for a Celeron M rig in a heartbeat, and for a period of time a Celeron M held the SuperPi world record(yes a Celeron held a record which has no other purpose than to measure the power of a processor).

[keakar]

a celeron d or a celeron m is no more a celeron then a p4 is a p2

my comments pertained to the first generation celerons only so if the discussion was about the celeron d then i take my comments back as they were off topic. as far as i know the celeron d is as you said a very good chip.

[Eric_Cartman]

a celeron d or a celeron m is still a celeron, of course the discussion is about modern processors, why would be be talking about processors that went extinct half a decade ago?

how could you think the discussion was about the original celerons when it starts of by talking about dual core celerons and celerons based of the Core architecture?

don't try to back out of the argument now by trying to say you didn't think we were talking about current generation processors that go by the celeron name

[keakar]

Hm... people seem to like the idea "Oh those Celerons are only broken Pentiums." The "broken"ness of the Celeron is some of the L2 cache being disabled because it doesn't work properly. So they brand them Celeron and sell them for cheap for companies to buy in mass quantities for their offices.

So how come we don't see any dual core celerons? Something along the lines of Core 2 Celeron ?? I would say Celeron D, but that is already taken, and they aren't dual core (Pentium D).

??

read the post and you will see he talking about first generation celerons and then asks why there are no core 2 celerons

but if it makes you feel better to talk down to people then may god help you.

EDIT: don't try to back out of the argument now by trying to say you didn't think we were talking about first generation celeron processors

[newtekie1]

EDIT: don't try to back out of the argument now by trying to say you didn't think we were talking about first generation celeron processors

Everyone but you seems to have picked up that the discussion was about current generation Celerons.

It doesn't seem like he is backing out of the argument at all, you are the one starting to take things back.

It was pretty obvious to the rest of us that it isn't exactly useful to talk about processors that haven't even been sold for 4+ years. While we are at it we can start debunking the 486SX and talk about how it was just a "crippled" 486DX, that would be just as useful of a discussion.

[Dippyskoodlez]

A celeron is a celeron, outbenched and outperformed by pentiums at stock speed, but when overclocked they overclock damn well. .:rant mode off:.

]

Celerons are much like gears in cars.


A celeron is a lot like first, or second gear.

A pentium/Athlon is much more like 3rd and 4th gear.

In order to hit the same speed as a pentium/athlon, it has to operate much, much, MUCH faster.


I remember the northwood celerons, it took 3.6Ghz to beat an Athlon xp 1700+.

And then, it was only marginal at best.

I don't see any "core2" celerons coming out for a long time.

Why?

Because the cache difference will make them BETTER than core 2 duo's($40 overclockers choice, or primary budget CPU) . Thus no reason to buy them.

Its the same thing AMD learned with durons and semprons.

In order to market a budget CPU, you have to **CRIPPLE** it to the point its almost in a wheelchair.

And doing that with a core2/Athlon 64 is so much more difficult than it was with a pentium 4/athlon XP.

[Zeratul_uy]

it's very simple really. if a pentium didn't meet the rated clock speeds at stock settings then it was renamed as a celeron. there was nothing wrong with it and many were tweaked by overclockers with great results. the whole point was intel had to guarrantee the clock speeds on the higher priced pentium it was selling to pc makers but wasn't giving the same promise about the celeron due to the price breaks. this is why the celerons were quickly labled inferier because they never seamed to perform to the speed ratings they were listed at. amd did the same thing with their chips but i can't remember the name of their second tier line.

the reason you don't see this anymore is because they can now make chips with such high quality control that the random underperforming chip is virtually no longer a reality.


Maybe could be "Duron"?

[Dippyskoodlez]

Maybe could be "Duron"?

Some of the applebred durons were able to have the "disabled" cache re-enabled, because AMD used a simple method of disabling this.


With the Athlon64's, and Core 2 duo's, this kind of crippling is much more difficult to obtain.

As for clock speeds, both companys are struggling to keep them as high as possible as it is :p

a 1.4ghz Athlon 64 "budget" is just gonna flat out suck.

[Casheti]

Pentiums are Pentiums, Celerons are Celerons. And when I get my Pentium D 2.8, I am going to be damn proud of it! Sucks that they use netburst though, but my proc will have 2x2MB L2 so no biggie

Don't do it... I have one.

[Zeratul_uy]

Some of the applebred durons were able to have the "disabled" cache re-enabled, because AMD used a simple method of disabling this.


With the Athlon64's, and Core 2 duo's, this kind of crippling is much more difficult to obtain.

As for clock speeds, both companys are struggling to keep them as high as possible as it is :p

a 1.4ghz Athlon 64 "budget" is just gonna flat out suck.


He just don't remember the name of celerons at AMD, i've just pointed that it could be Duron, at least that's what i think ^^ don't blame me plz :D i never had a Celeron D or M, just a Celeron 333 and a Celeron 466 that i used to do minor tasks, as downloading stuff...

[KennyT772]

durons/semprons...duh guys.

[Casheti]

I was on a Sempron yesterday and it was poo. The mouse actually lagged while I was converting an .avi to .vob & .bup files. Basically the PC was unusable.

[Wile E]

I was on a Sempron yesterday and it was poo. The mouse actually lagged while I was converting an .avi to .vob & .bup files. Basically the PC was unusable.

That's because you've been spoiled by dual core. (Me too. lol)

[Casheti]

Yea, never realised how cool dual cores are, even when they are as slow as mine.

How's your 2900XT treating you?

[Wile E]

So far so good. No probs yet and running fairly cool, believe it or not. (bout the same as my old X1800XT, 74-75c)

[Casheti]

Mmmmm, I want one :(

I can afford one but I'm gonna get a 360 instead. Too many bottlenecks in my PC to run a card like that.

[Wile E]

Ewww, tough call. 360 or 2900XT? I'm glad I don't have to make that call. lol

[Casheti]

Yea I know lol :confused:

I won't have this kind of money again for a LONG time.

[Wile E]

Truth be told, my cpu still bottlenecks this thing, but it doesn't prevent me from playing absolutely anything at 1440x900 with everything maxed.

[Casheti]

Well this CPU is too weak anyways... and without an OC board it's pointless upgrading any further.

360 FTW :toast: :D

And seeing as I plan to flash the DVD drive, I'm gonna make a youtube video of my live account getting banned lol...

[newtekie1]

I was on a Sempron yesterday and it was poo. The mouse actually lagged while I was converting an .avi to .vob & .bup files. Basically the PC was unusable.

The really low end Semprons are just an absolute pain to work on, as are the Celerons Ds. But the Semprons are like the Celerons in that they overclock very well most of the time. Encoding and things like that tend to bog them down, but that is because they are single core processor, the same happens to their big brothers. Though hyper-threading does help that issue on the P4 side a little.

Personally I think the market for the full blown single core processors has dried up. If you are going to go single core then a Sempron/Celeron would be enough. Anyone that actually needs more power will probably go dual core, even if it is a cheap one like a 3600+.

[hat]

Even I am going dual core soon, and I don't have money :laugh:
newtekie is right in this case

[Casheti]

For God's sake DO NOT buy P4 Dual Core!!! (unless j00 iz gonna clock it mahussive style)

If you're going Intel, get a Core 2.

[Tatty_One]

Glad to hear that you went the Pentium D route. Celerons Ds were good alternatives to Pentium 4's, especially if you are an overclocker.
I would love to see a Dual Core Celeron, and a Dual Core Sempron. But to be honest you can pick up an 6300 core 2 for soo cheap their is no market for Celerons. Just like there isn't a good market for Sempron because x2 3600-4600 is soo cheap it makes purchasing a budget single core pointless

In effect there is a dual core Semperon, in all but name, there is a 3800 x2 model I beleive with just 2 x256Kb L2 Cache.

[Wile E]

It's the X2 3600+ with the Windsor core, tatty.

[Ketxxx]

Pentium D isnt THAT bad once it hits like 4.4GHz+, and is a good alternative to anyone with an intel but ther board wont support C2D. I doubt single core CPU demand will dry up anytime soon either, I see plenty of systems sold using single core still, and in the office single core is all thats needed for word processing, and companies being companies, anywhere they can cut costs, they will.

[Tatty_One]

It's the X2 3600+ with the Windsor core, tatty.

Thanks, close enuff for an old geezer tho! I knew what I meant even if noone else knew, that I knew that they knew that I meant nothing if you get my drift :eek:

[JrRacinFan]

Thanks, close enuff for an old geezer tho! I knew what I meant even if noone else knew, that I knew that they knew that I meant nothing if you get my drift :eek:

Ummm, Tatty you totally confused me, I had to read that like 10 times!!! :laugh: ... thats sig material right there ....

[bigboi86]

It's not a celeron unless it says celeron :/ ??

**a side note: How do you think a pentium d 2.8 presler core, 2x2MB L2 cache, would stand up to a c2d E4300?

Celeron is just a name. It could be used on any core they want.

That's like saying socket A Durons weren't Athlons(you could even unlock durons to athlons, it will even say Athlon in BIOS).

[JrRacinFan]

Speaking of which BigBoi, I wish there was a way to unlock HTT and the last 3/4 of the L2 cache on this Cedar Mill Celery.

[hat]

Casheti, I do not havethe funds for any C2D...
so many people think everyone has infinate funds...

[Casheti]

I'm not sayin that at all, I'm just saying you will be dissappointed if you get a Pentium D over a C2D that will cost next to nothing more.

I myself own a Pentium D and they're not too good unless clocked.

[newtekie1]

Even at lower speeds a Pentium D isn't all that bad. A Core 2 Duo would be a lot better, but if you can't afford it a Pentium D isn't going to kill you. You don't have to overclock them to extremes to get decent performance, my 805 sitting at 3GHz does just fine.

A Core 2 Duo doesn't cost "next to nothing more". There is actually about a $30 difference between a 2.8GHz Pentium D and the E4300, which is a lot when you are building on a budget. $30 can mean the difference between having enough and not. And of course there is about a $55 difference between the 2.66GHz Pentium D and the E4300. If I had an extreme budget I would go with the 805 and put the money elsewhere, especially with the Intel price cuts so close. Start saving for the $266 Q6600.

[bigboi86]

30 dollars IS next to nothing more. Even if you're broke as hell. Can't you just wait another week? Mow someone's grass? Trust me, I've made buys like that, and ended up unhappy.

Get a 4300 or something man, sell something, pawn something, whatever. If you're going to upgrade, upgrade. Don't upgrade to something only slightly better, especially if you already not satisfied with what you already have.

[erocker]

You guys have to remember that he pays a lot more living in Australia.

[hat]

Who lives in Australia?

[Casheti]

Lol erocker got owned.

[Tatty_One]

30 dollars IS next to nothing more. Even if you're broke as hell. Can't you just wait another week? Mow someone's grass? Trust me, I've made buys like that, and ended up unhappy.

Get a 4300 or something man, sell something, pawn something, whatever. If you're going to upgrade, upgrade. Don't upgrade to something only slightly better, especially if you already not satisfied with what you already have.

Would selling the wife qualify? Have doubts tho that she would fetch $30, more like I would need to pay that to get rid of her! :cry:

[newtekie1]

30 dollars IS next to nothing more.

Not for everyone.

[bigboi86]

Not for everyone.

Unless you live in a 3rd world country it is.

I have 85 cents to my name right now, and I still say this.

I know if I really need 30dollars there are ways of getting it. Hell. fine some old scrap metal, and go to a scrap center. I earned 55dollars in an hour hauling off metal for someone once. That is an easy way to make some cash. You can also do yard work for neighbors.

Trust me.....30 bucks for a HUGE difference in performance is worth the extra work!

Or you can just get the barely better netburst crap cpu, be disappointed, and remember only 30bucks could have brought you happiness.

:P:P:P

[Zeratul_uy]

Unless you live in a 3rd world country it is.

I have 85 cents to my name right now, and I still say this.

I know if I really need 30dollars there are ways of getting it. Hell. fine some old scrap metal, and go to a scrap center. I earned 55dollars in an hour hauling off metal for someone once. That is an easy way to make some cash. You can also do yard work for neighbors.

Trust me.....30 bucks for a HUGE difference in performance is worth the extra work!

Or you can just get the barely better netburst crap cpu, be disappointed, and remember only 30bucks could have brought you happiness.

:P:P:P


I don't live in a 3rd world country and i can't do a yard for 30 dollars... i surely get shooted if i say "hi i come to cut your grass :D it's just 30 dollars" lol and 30 dollars it's a difference... you can have a soundblaster or two for that money :P
Dunno it's just an opinion xD

[JrRacinFan]

I do not know to you but with myself being a budget mid range gamer. $30 means the difference between a Geforce 6200 and an ATI X1600. Just a little dabble.

My point is, a Celeron D with an ATI X1600 or a C2D with onboard grfx, see what I mean?

[newtekie1]

A Celeron D with an x1600 does mighty fine in games actually. :D

[Zeratul_uy]

A Celeron D with an x1600 does mighty fine in games actually. :D

Agree with that...
And it's a good point... But maybe you can buy the C2D, use the onboard vid meanwhile you earn for a decent VC... no? :D

[kwchang007]

Agree with that...
And it's a good point... But maybe you can buy the C2D, use the onboard vid meanwhile you earn for a decent VC... no? :D

lol onboard video sucks. just beyond reason bad....we have onboard video for our p4 it can't even run counter stike source at the lowest settings, but the p4 may be the problem ,lol.

[JrRacinFan]

Of course Zeratul, but what happens if you dont have the extra at the same time to you buy mobo/cpu/ram. I means its always a give take situation.

Cel D+7600GS+half decent mobo+ram = ~215 + ability to get a better proc later

C2D+decent mobo w/onboard+ram =~245 + the ability to get a better grfx card later.

Always give and take, if you wanna play games now and upgrade later - OR - not play games at a more decent framerate now and upgrade later.

I myself went the first route, I plan on getting a new mobo then waiting for the July 22nd price cut.

[Zeratul_uy]

Of course Zeratul, but what happens if you dont have the extra at the same time to you buy mobo/cpu/ram. I means its always a give take situation.

Cel D+7600GS+half decent mobo+ram = ~215 + ability to get a better proc later

C2D+decent mobo w/onboard+ram =~245 + the ability to get a better grfx card later.

Always give and take, if you wanna play games now and upgrade later - OR - not play games at a more decent framerate now and upgrade later.

I myself went the first route, I plan on getting a new mobo then waiting for the July 22nd price cut.

That's what i mean, i can buy the best processor, the best mobo, nice 4-4-4 timing sticks and use the onboard vid meanwhile i save to buy a nice one, a 7600GS is not bad, but you can buy a better one saving for a month, for example...
Or, you can have a mid range pc just coz you couldn't wait to have a 7600GS :P

Dunno, as i always say, it's an opinion xD in my case, i'd rather wait and buy a good one than buy a crappy one :/

[newtekie1]

I'd take the x1600 and Celeron D over a Core 2 Duo and onboard. If you want to play games onboard isn't an option, there just isn't an onboard video option available that is powerful enough to play current games. Besides that, most motherboards with onboard graphics suck(especially if you overclock), so you would probably be wanting to upgrade the motherboard down the road too.

[Zeratul_uy]

I'd take the x1600 and Celeron D over a Core 2 Duo and onboard. If you want to play games onboard isn't an option, there just isn't an onboard video option available that is powerful enough to play current games. Besides that, most motherboards with onboard graphics suck(especially if you overclock), so you would probably be wanting to upgrade the motherboard down the road too.

Dunno, it was just an opinion :P to wait or not to wait, this is the question...

[bigboi86]

He's not saying he would keep the onboard graphics for gaming.

Another option is, get a decent mobo without onboard graphics, and get a 15dollar display adapter for temporary. This is what I'm about to be doing.

[newtekie1]

He's not saying he would keep the onboard graphics for gaming.

Another option is, get a decent mobo without onboard graphics, and get a 15dollar display adapter for temporary. This is what I'm about to be doing.

Yes I know, but if he is buying the machine for gaming it is kind of pointless to buy it and not put a graphics card in it. If he is going to do that he might as well just wait until he can afford the whole thing, chances are priced will have dropped slightly by then anyway and he can actually get more for the money.

There is always the option of getting a really cheap but capable graphics card now and putting that money into the Core 2 Duo, assuming saving up money is easy and the upgrade will happen pretty quickly, but if you are one of those people where and extra $30 is hard to save then that probably isn't a good option because you will be saving for a long long time before you can afford any card that would put that Core 2 Duo to the test.

I guess I have always been more of a person to build balanced machines right from the get go, I always seem more happy in the end with a machine with everything about the same level of performance as opposed to a machine that has something really really good in it and all the power going wasted because something else is holding it back. I can see one side where people are saying netburst processors suck and when paired with high end graphics solutions like the 8800/2900 series they show their weakness, but on the same token you are basically doing the exact opposite. You are telling him to get a very high end processor and a graphics solution that will severally hold the processor back, it is the same concept just with different parts, and usually a processor is cheaper to upgrade than a video card. I say just balance the computer out and upgrade both later if you want.

[keakar]

i say keep what you have now and wait till you can afford a c2d with good graffics card. if you get what you are suggesting you will waste $ and end up with little or no noticable difference in your computer.

you guys keep recommending buy this buy that, don't get me wrong now because i agree with what you said but i disagree with what you haven't said, it's better to stay with what you have now untill you can afford a c2d system later when it comes down to your price range.

why go the lesser route and spend $ he obviously doesn't have to waste, and get the pentium d when we all know the only change he will see is his bank account lower.

the biggest part of being helpfull also includes talking someone out of making a mistake not just stearing them to a lesser mistake.

i'm not sure any of us think buying a pentium d at this time is smart since major CPU price drops are comming this summer and the man repeatedly said he had no money to waste.

i meant this comment using this thread as an example as a general view of all posts where i see a person is better served talked off the edge of wasting $ and request we think about it.

yes i saw some saying not to go the pentium d route but i didn't notice if anyone told him not to upgrade at all, which IMHO was the best advice in this instance.

sometimes it's better to ride an old horse till it's dead instead of buying a new saddle for it.

[Zeratul_uy]

i say keep what you have now and wait till you can afford a c2d with good graffics card. if you get what you are suggesting you will waste $ and end up with little or no noticable difference in your computer.

you guys keep recommending buy this buy that, don't get me wrong now because i agree with what you said but i disagree with what you haven't said, it's better to stay with what you have now untill you can afford a c2d system later when it comes down to your price range.

why go the lesser route and spend $ he obviously doesn't have to waste, and get the pentium d when we all know the only change he will see is his bank account lower.

the biggest part of being helpfull also includes talking someone out of making a mistake not just stearing them to a lesser mistake.

i'm not sure any of us think buying a pentium d at this time is smart since major CPU price drops are comming this summer and the man repeatedly said he had no money to waste.

i meant this comment using this thread as an example as a general view of all posts where i see a person is better served talked off the edge of wasting $ and request we think about it.

yes i saw some saying not to go the pentium d route but i didn't notice if anyone told him not to upgrade at all, which IMHO was the best advice in this instance.

sometimes it's better to ride an old horse till it's dead instead of buying a new saddle for it.

He's right. Lol we are kinda selfish (he makes me feel embarassed -.-)