First:
This is a celeron 2.2Ghz from a Dell Inspiron 1100. It's not a bad machine for what it needs to do. For day to day tasks in windows, there's enough power to run most of anything you might want to do. It does start showing it's weaknesses if you start running too many programs at once. It only has 256MB of DDR333 so that is a factor. With another 512 stick, this thing should do fine.
Second:
This is a Pentium 4-M 2.0 Ghz from a Toshiba Satellite. This is the mobile version of the Pentium 4, NOT a Pentium M. This is the predecessor to the Pentium M. The performance is about the same as the celeron 2.2. This one had more ram (512) so multitasking was a bit speedier. The laptop itself was rather large, but it was able to take 10+ hours of folding without missing a beat. Another 512 of ram would do well for this machine.
Something to notice is the FSB of both machines. The true FSB is only about a 100Mhz, but being intel chips, the FSB's are quad-pumped for 400Mhz effective Bus. Having never owned a Pentium of these speeds (my fastest Pentium is a 700Mhz P3), I couldn't say how much the slow bus affected overall speed. I know that on my Athlon64, with the integrated memroy controller, the FSB has become less of an issue.
From these shots, the major difference between the two processors is that the P4-M has twice the L2 cache of the celeron 256k vs. 512k. Cache does make a big difference in performance.
Other than that, both processors seem to perform comparitively.
No comments:
Post a Comment