OpenGL Gaming Performance

The performance of Northwood Celerons is horrible here, but Prescott takes the lead in Quake III.

Wolfenstein: Enemy Territory is based on an extended version of the Quake III engine, and under this benchmark, the Athlons come out on top.

Quake III Arena

Wolfenstein: Enemy Territory

Unreal Tournament 2003 Benchmark 3D Rendering Performance
POST A COMMENT

54 Comments

View All Comments

  • mino - Thursday, June 24, 2004 - link

    #21 I didn't intend to make me looka 'smart', nor is my opinion I am :).
    But actually every second to third sentence in this article hurt me. To clarify, I just didn't and doesn't understand how someone who is making such review could make such a mistake, unless he is incompetent. And this fact is NOT good, it is BAD.

    Cheers.
    Reply
  • glennpratt - Thursday, June 24, 2004 - link

    The fastest AMD proc is 2600+/2500+ Kinda lame VS 2.8 ghz Reply
  • Dennis Travis - Thursday, June 24, 2004 - link

    mino, You better read it again, Anand did NOT write the review. Reply
  • Saist - Thursday, June 24, 2004 - link

    Holy.... I just got finished reading the article, and I wonder how the Celeron D @2.6ghz would fare against a 2.6ghz P4, as I already know how an Athlon 2400+ fares against a 2.6ghz.

    Seriously... if these prices are right, I might not have such a big issue building Celeron boxes for people...
    Reply
  • elec999 - Thursday, June 24, 2004 - link

    Almost forgot sorry, hows is the celeron D at intell 2.8gig compare to Intel Pentium 4 -520 and 2.8-GHz. Is the extra cost of the intel p4 at 2.8gig worth it. Reply
  • elec999 - Thursday, June 24, 2004 - link

    I would love to see Celeron D perform against a overclocked amd xp2500+m or better. Also I would like to see how well the celeron D overclocks. Lastly I would like to see some seti per work unit benchmark results. Intel is really showing competition against AMD, it really sucks that AMD is unable to win in the heart of many computer users who are not hardware friendly. Reply
  • Marlin1975 - Thursday, June 24, 2004 - link

    Its still not thet GREAT of a improvemnet when you look at price compared to AthlonXPs for the SAME price, let alone the semprons.


    Could you please update it or do another look and see what the Temps are? Would be nice to see if heat is more from the L2 cache or just the design?
    Reply
  • kmmatney - Thursday, June 24, 2004 - link

    You can by the Athlon Mobile XP 2600+ for $95 at NewEgg, so it would be good to see a comparison between this and the celeron D, especially in regards to overclocking. Reply
  • nserra - Thursday, June 24, 2004 - link

    %23 Sorry about the post, I was typing at the time so...

    It seams that the "future" celeron have 512kb cache when will be based on the 2MB P4. How soon is the P4 2MB cache is to come on the Intel roadmap?
    Reply
  • nserra - Thursday, June 24, 2004 - link

    What a bad review!
    Northwood Celeron has 128kb cache, not 256kb. How can it say the improvements came from L1 cache, FSB and core enhancements? Where are those improvements under prescott p4 vs northwood p4?

    Willamette P4 is a better compare since it's also 256kb cache. (#10)

    What about heat, and thermal dissipation, power requirements, ...

    To notebook systems seam good, price is good.
    For me with these performance improvements is a better buy then P4 systems for offices/corporations, since most of people have their computer to have a picture of their children on the desktop, and a stupid screen saver, and a type writer program, so that will do.

    Really bad review must be offline as soon as possible, or as soon the mistakes are removed.....
    Reply

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now