|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
Lionel,
I am a little out of date, so I could stnad
corrected on recent events. A little history: Intel was caught off-guard
with the sub-$1000 phenomenon (time flies, this must have been 3-4 years ago!)
and moved quickly to counter AMD in this space. The best they could do to
save money on short notice was to come up with a no-cache version, code named
Covington. At this time, the PII had 512K L2 cache on a separate die
packaged in the Slot-1 form factor, which was very expensive to
produce. Covington was the first Celeron, but the Mendocino version
was in the works as the 2nd generation; this had an integrated on-die cache,
128K as I recall. So, from about 6 months after its initial introduction,
Celeron has had L2 cache. Pentium was moving to a 100MHz front side bus
and Celeron was still 66MHz, so there was another difference. Because of
the rush, Celerons were first offered as a funky open SEPP cartrudge form;
Mendocino evolved to offer a cost-reduced PPGA cartridge.
There was a point in time, ca. 1999, when the L2
caceh on Celeron was actually faster than Pentium. Because of the quicker
move to on-die cache, Celeron first has full speed cache. The larger cache
size caused on-die cache to be later for Pentium. Pentium had a separate
cache that could only be driven at 1/2 the back-side bus speed.
Except for some highly integrated (e.g. onboard
graphics that I am not sure ever made it to market) chips, Celeron has
traditionally used the same processor technology as Pentium. One way
we know the Celeron has changed considerably since introduction is the speeds
now available. The top Celeron is now 900MHz with a 100MHz front side
bus. It had to undergo basic architectural changes to quadruple its
speed.
Again, I am not necessarily current, but I think
the difference between Celeron and PIII is the smaller 128k L2 cache and 100MHz
FSB vs. 133. The P4 is a different architecture altogether, with 1.8GHz
speeds, 400MHz FSB, etc. A not insignificant difference is in your
question: "...because the Celeron is used on cheaper computers ...". This
is a marketing, not a technical, issue, but the fact is that the OEM's will put
lower performing components around a Celeron for a cheaper total
system.
That's all I know!
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=ltr
style="PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
----- Original Message -----
<DIV
style="BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: black">From:
Lionel
Issen
To: <A title=metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
href="mailto:metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx";>metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Tuesday, August 14, 2001 6:47
AM
Subject: Re: computer graphic card
memory
Free:
Thanks for bringing me up to date on the Celeron.
Can you tell me what the intrinsic differences are between the Celeron
and other microprocessors. I assumed that because the Celeron is used on
cheaper computers that it hadn't been changed.
Lionel Issen<A
href="mailto:lissen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx";>lissen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=ltr
style="PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
----- Original Message -----
<DIV
style="BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: black">From:
Free
To: <A title=metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
href="mailto:metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx";>metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Monday, August 13, 2001 9:19
PM
Subject: Re: computer graphic card
memory
The original Celeron (2-3 years ago) had no L2
cache, but 2nd generation and above do have an integrated L2
cache.
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=ltr
style="PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
----- Original Message -----
<DIV
style="BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: black">From:
Lionel
Issen
To: <A title=metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
href="mailto:metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx";>metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Monday, August 13, 2001 7:26
PM
Subject: Re: computer graphic card
memory
Dave D.
You are correct about the Celeron it has no
cache. As a general rule, when I buy a new computer, I want the hardware
not to be integrated. Its cheaper and easier to make changes and
repairs.
Lionel Issen<A
href="mailto:lissen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx";>lissen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=ltr
style="PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
----- Original Message -----
<DIV
style="BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: black">From:
David
DeFina
To: <A
title=metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
href="mailto:metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx";>metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Monday, August 13, 2001 10:43
AM
Subject: RE: computer graphic card
memory
<FONT face=Arial color=navy
size=2><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: Arial; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt">My
two cents is don’t purchase a computer with an integrated graphics card,
especially with 4mb ram.
That’s like buying a car with a governor that keeps it below
45mph. The Cache is
different from the Ram memory.
It resides near the processor and offloads tasks to free up the
processor and allows faster throughput.<SPAN
style="mso-spacerun: yes"> 256K is what comes with a
Celeron chip and the Pentium usually has 512K.<SPAN
style="mso-spacerun: yes"> Don’t torture yourself with that
computer. Just my
opinion. Dave
D.
<FONT face=Tahoma
color=black size=2><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: black; FONT-FAMILY: Tahoma">-----Original
Message-----From:
owner-metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:owner-metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]<SPAN
style="FONT-WEIGHT: bold">On Behalf Of
MayTseshuyan1@xxxxxxx<SPAN
style="FONT-WEIGHT: bold">Sent: Aug 10, 2001 6:21
PMTo:
metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx<SPAN
style="FONT-WEIGHT: bold">Subject: computer graphic card
memory
<FONT
face="Times New Roman" size=3>
<FONT face=Arial
color=black size=3><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; COLOR: black; FONT-FAMILY: Arial">I am looking
at new computer and also thinking of buying a good charting
program. Dell told me this new computer I am thinking
of purchasing has a graphic card that is 'integrated', meaning
unremovable, and also 4mb ram only. He suggested I check
first to see if it may not be strong enough for my intended charting
software program. He also mentioned the cache is 256mb , and I
read a good charting program needs to work on 512mb cache.
I am thinking of putting 256x2 mb ram onto this
new computer. Is Cache & Ram 2
different kinds of memories? I thought I know I lot, but now I
really think I know nothing...:-( TYIA for any guidances....
Have a nice weekend, all of you :-)<FONT
color=black><SPAN
style="COLOR: black; mso-color-alt: windowtext">
|