Paranoid Marvin Posted June 18, 2007 Share Posted June 18, 2007 I'm looking at building a dirt cheap computer (hopefully a Hackintosh) and I was hoping for some advice in the Celeron area. The first processor is this one. It's a 3.06ghz Celeron D347 with a 533mhz FSB. (SL9XU) The second one is this one. A 1.6ghz Celeron D420 with an 800mhz FSB. (SL9XP) Both models have 512kb of L2 and are 65nm. The 1.6ghz one runs much cooler though, at only 35W, which will be great for a quiet PC. The 1.6ghz version also has a higher model number... After searching Intel's page, the 1.6ghz version has a few features the 3.06ghz doesn't have: Enhanced Halt State (C1E) Intel® Thermal Monitor 2 So, which one would be faster here and if so, by how much? This is actually the first Intel PC I've built in a long time, so I am a bit clueless at the moment Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colonel Posted June 18, 2007 Share Posted June 18, 2007 Trust me, from personal experiences, I can tell you now that you do not want a Celeron. Sure, they're dirt cheap, but you definately get what you paid for in performance. I have a 2.7GHz Celero and it can be painfully slow at some of the most simple tasks. Just save your money and get a Core Duo or Core 2 Duo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paranoid Marvin Posted June 18, 2007 Author Share Posted June 18, 2007 Hmm, I will have to check my bank Can you recommend a good C2D, preferably <60W Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
U.C. Posted June 18, 2007 Share Posted June 18, 2007 Also, unknown to most people, AGPGart.kext offers actual AGP acceleration on very few chipsets. In most chipsets, it offers nothing more than changing PCI to AGP. Thus unless you are buying one of the supported boards, be wary of AGP slot computers. Go for PCIe Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marliwahoo Posted June 18, 2007 Share Posted June 18, 2007 Pentium D915 (dual core) $81 http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx...82E16819116253R The core2 is better. The pentium d works fine (a good deal compared to a celeron) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Schwinn555 Posted June 18, 2007 Share Posted June 18, 2007 I've got the Celeron D 352 3.2 GB 512 L2 cache. It over clocks to 4.2 and I'm very happy with it. I wasn't expecting much but it matched my budget. I was planning on upgrading to a core 2 duo as soon as they dropped in price. It runs so well I now have no plans to upgrade . I'm running OSX 10.4.9 fulltime. The Pentium D will send your utility bill to a new high level not to mention turn the room into a furnace.They run way hot. Celerons got a bad name when they came with 256k L2 cache as they were slow.The 512 cache chips are much better.The 420 CeleronD is so new not much info. I'm guessing they will be great budget option at half the price of the cheapest core 2 duo. At only a bit more then $50.00 not much of a gamble nor loss if you later decide to upgrade. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paranoid Marvin Posted June 18, 2007 Author Share Posted June 18, 2007 Pentium D915 (dual core) $81 http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx...82E16819116253R The core2 is better. The pentium d works fine (a good deal compared to a celeron) Pentium D? I could heat my house with one of those That's the one you posted 95W is a lot - I would like to keep things cool and quiet if at all possible. What I was thinking of doing was grabbing a dirt cheap Celeron for now, and then upgrade about 9 months down the line when Penryn is really taking off Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alessandro17 Posted June 18, 2007 Share Posted June 18, 2007 Pentium D915 (dual core) $81 Very good value for money. Also the D920 should be very cheap by now. However even the cheapest Core 2 Duo should outperform most Pentium D (and of course Celerons). Have a look: http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/Intel-Core-2-Duo-E64...3QQcmdZViewItem Paranoid Marvin, remember to buy a compatible mobo if you want to run OS X. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paranoid Marvin Posted June 18, 2007 Author Share Posted June 18, 2007 Paranoid Marvin, remember to buy a compatible mobo if you want to run OS X. Is this mobo a good idea? It's not on the HCL, but the 945GZM version is (perhaps a typo?) The C2D do all run quite hot... This one is only 65W, but still quite a lot... Can't I put a 1.5ghz MPC7447A in it, which only sucks 35W? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
one_7 Posted June 18, 2007 Share Posted June 18, 2007 Bad Axe Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alessandro17 Posted June 18, 2007 Share Posted June 18, 2007 Is this mobo a good idea?It's not on the HCL, but the 945GZM version is (perhaps a typo?) Great bargain, but who knows if it is compatible? The C2D do all run quite hot... Who told you that? My C2D E6600 runs much cooler than any previous CPU. This one is only 65W, but still quite a lot... Funny, I had never seen that before... It looks like a dirt cheap C2D. Can't I put a 1.5ghz MPC7447A in it, which only sucks 35W? Huh? Of course you are only joking... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azurael Posted June 18, 2007 Share Posted June 18, 2007 Haha... "Celeron D Performance" - Isn't that an oxymoron? The new Celeron 4xx parts are Conroe-Ls though, so they should perform like half a Core 2 Duo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
four! Posted June 19, 2007 Share Posted June 19, 2007 Celeron 2.8GHz with 2GB RAM works fine on a fulltime Hackintosh for me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blackandblue Posted June 19, 2007 Share Posted June 19, 2007 Ive been running a celeron d 336 (2.8ghz) for probably about a year or so. Im happy with it. It is a bit slow, like the comments say above, but for browsing, watching divx's, torrents, mp3's etc its fine. It can chug a bit, and you definately feel the pinch when running rosetta apps or parallels or vmware, but if budget is your only option (as mine was) then you cant complain too much about them. IMHO spend the cash saved from going celeron over pentiumd or core on extra ram and upgrade the processor later when you can afford it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
adder Posted June 20, 2007 Share Posted June 20, 2007 Would these new Celeron 400 series be powerful enough to run front row? Let's say combined with 2gb ram and a cheap Ati X1300 graphics card??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A Nonny Moose Posted June 20, 2007 Share Posted June 20, 2007 DON'T GET A CELERY POROCESSOR, period. They are very watered down and tend to run everything slowly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cheese N' Pancakes Posted June 20, 2007 Share Posted June 20, 2007 i would get a pentium 4 or a pentium 4 HT ( hyper threading ) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hagar Posted June 20, 2007 Share Posted June 20, 2007 a good alternative to a celeron D today is the Pentium 4 631 which is selling cheaply many places, and has 2mb cache & 8-way hyperthreading.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OMX-Knuckles Posted June 20, 2007 Share Posted June 20, 2007 Thing about the low-end Pentium D's (805, 915) is that they use about the same power as a Pentium 4 or Celeron D Heat your house? Not quite. Maybe with an Extreme Edition. Prescott Pentium 4's are rated at 89W; Celeron D's are rated the same- because they're just Pentium 4's with half thier cache locked. Pentium D 805's and 915's are rated at 95W. MUCH faster proc and I can tell you from personal experience that they're easy to cool. A 915 would be a great deal for a cheap Hackintosh. EDIT- I should also mention that all S939 Athlon X2's are 89W or 110W and AM2 X2's are either 65W or 89W, with the exception of the HE versions which are 35W and the FX-62 and 6000+, which are 125W. Core 2 Duo's are 65W, Quads are 130W and Core Duo mobiles are 35W. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
adder Posted June 20, 2007 Share Posted June 20, 2007 guys, the thing about these new Celeron 400 is they are 35 watts! I read somewhere performance is like half a core 2 duo. and they have 512k cache... Paranoid Marvin, check out www.scan.co.uk The have an ECS motherboard for £34, the Celeron 430 for £34 and 2gb for £42 How cheap is that!? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alicheusz Posted June 20, 2007 Share Posted June 20, 2007 IMHO spend the cash saved from going celeron over pentiumd or core on extra ram and upgrade the processor later when you can afford it. I have Celleron D 2.53 Ghz and run it full time on my hackintosh. I agree with blackandblue everythings runs fine expect virtualization and rosetta. RAM is the key you will need loots of it. I have 1.5 GB and need more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ProMacUser Posted June 20, 2007 Share Posted June 20, 2007 I can say 1 thing. Cel D suxxxxx. It's problem is low Cache!!!!! It slows the processor. It's much better to buy a 2.4 P4 HT than a 2.8 Cel D. I bet it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Schwinn555 Posted June 20, 2007 Share Posted June 20, 2007 Newer Celeron D's are 65ns and i believe 60 watts or so. Older ones were 90ns and much the same as the Pentium 4's & D's . Also many have 512 K L2 cache unlike the slow 256K L 2 chips which are dog slow. Just because older Celerons were lame doesn't mean things haven't changed a bit. Yes they will be slower then the Pentium D's and core 2 duo but then they cost less then half the money and many people if they choose wisely are happy with them. As posted earlier i only bought the Celeron D 352 3.2 GB 512K L2 cache because of limited funds and also not sure how the hacIntosh would work out. I sure didn't need a machine that would only run windows. If the HacIntosh worked out I expected to upgrade to the Core2 Duo as soon as they dropped in price. It did work out but as it clocks to 4.2 GB and runs great I see no reason to upgrade the cpu. Maybe one day but not now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paranoid Marvin Posted June 30, 2007 Author Share Posted June 30, 2007 guys, the thing about these new Celeron 400 is they are 35 watts!I read somewhere performance is like half a core 2 duo. and they have 512k cache... Paranoid Marvin, check out www.scan.co.uk The have an ECS motherboard for £34, the Celeron 430 for £34 and 2gb for £42 How cheap is that!? That's why they are so attractive - I would like to keep some ice for the kids, so no Pentium Ds Looks like a good shop, thanks adder! What are their deliveries like? Cheap? I had huge problems with Ebuyer, because of where I live (Scottish Highlands) so they charge me a huge amount for my P&P and were 5 days late!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jez6345789 Posted July 7, 2007 Share Posted July 7, 2007 Hi I recently built my first Hackintosh after lurking around here for a good time and as a proof of concept used one of the latest Celerons along with an Asus P5LD2-VM following the Diabolik how to in the guide section. It really was a piece of cake and for less than a couple of hours work I have a fully functioning Hackintosh (all bar the red ide chanel) The board will take a Core Duo so after the expected July price drop the machine will get a faster brain. Until then the machine is stable and the speed is fine, I do not need to render heavy weight 3d or crunch video so for general work its a nice a good test and a nice low cost solution. enjoy Jez Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts