Intel Celeron Dual Core E3300 Overclocking Review.

[rgathright]

Just finished my latest Intel Socket 775 review.
http://www.bayreviews.com/computers/18374
I was able to hit 3.125Ghz on air cooling using a Scythe SCMN-1100 MINE Rev.B 3 Heat Pipes CPU Cooler. The processor does an impressive job for a Celeron, especially when compared to the Intel E8600.

Would the E3300 work in a bargain gaming rig? I think so!

Here are the performance charts:

[Blibbax]

My 3GHZ core 2 is starting to feel its age. I'd never even consider putting one in a PC today, unless it was strictly for word processing etc.

[rgathright]

My 3GHZ core 2 is starting to feel its age. I'd never even consider putting one in a PC today, unless it was strictly for word processing etc.

How so?

[SXRguyinMA]

yea how so? my C2Q Q6600 is more than fast enough for anything I do with it. why spend money on an i-series, adn the motherboard and memory to go with it, when the core series still works more than adequately for 90% of the population?

I mean hell, all 5 of the computers here at my work are still P4, ranging from 1.8GHz to 2.8GHz, all with ~1GB RAM, and they're still not even worked 100%

[diluzio91]

i think he was reffering to a c2d, and going from a dual core to a quad core made a HUGE difference. its like night and day, while a dual core is good for word processing and such, for gaming i would have to give it a pass.

[rgathright]

i think he was reffering to a c2d, and going from a dual core to a quad core made a HUGE difference. its like night and day, while a dual core is good for word processing and such, for gaming i would have to give it a pass.

If you look at my SuperPi chart, a lowly dual core E8600 leads the pack. We all know spending $$$ on a great SLI video card is going to do more than any expensive i7 processor.

I guess I need to put some $ in a NVIDIA GTX for BayReviews and test it out on a few mobo configs before making any more conclusions.

[Blibbax]

How so?

Recent games are considerably held back by it at high settings. Even for movie editing etc., modern applications are optimised for 4 core CPUs. Then, of course, there's the multitasking.

yea how so? my C2Q Q6600 is more than fast enough for anything I do with it. why spend money on an i-series, adn the motherboard and memory to go with it, when the core series still works more than adequately for 90% of the population?

I mean hell, all 5 of the computers here at my work are still P4, ranging from 1.8GHz to 2.8GHz, all with ~1GB RAM, and they're still not even worked 100%

Firstly, in my own experience, a Q6600 is way faster even in single threaded applications than either an E3400 or similar low end C2D based CPU.

Secondly, the P4 computers are your work are loaded at 100% at the very least when opening programs, loading windows, and playing back HD Youtube. I still have my P4 rig, and it struggles with what I'd describe today as normal everyday use.

If you look at my SuperPi chart, a lowly dual core E8600 leads the pack. We all know spending $$$ on a great SLI video card is going to do more than any expensive i7 processor.

I guess I need to put some $ in a NVIDIA GTX for BayReviews and test it out on a few mobo configs before making any more conclusions.

Firstly, the "lowly" (>£100...) dual core E8600 leads the pack because of its massive cache per core and very high stock clock speed. Remember that SuperPi is entirely single threaded.

Secondly, an E8600 is one hell of a lot faster than an E3400 or similar low end C2D CPU.

Thirdly, I think you'll find that many modern games will show huge gains from an upgrade to a modern quad core CPU, especially from a weaker dual core, if they already have a powerful GPU.

[x88x]

I have, iirc, an E3400 (or maybe E3200..I forget) in my server, and I agree, they're good, solid chips. The small L2 cache would have an affect on any gaming though, I think.

i think he was reffering to a c2d, and going from a dual core to a quad core made a HUGE difference. its like night and day, while a dual core is good for word processing and such, for gaming i would have to give it a pass.

Heheh, try going from single core to quad core. That's what I did with my current system. Athlon 64 FX-55 to C2Q 9450. The difference was really, as you said, night and day...even coming from one of the most powerful single-core CPUs ever made.

[rgathright]

Recent games are considerably held back by it at high settings. Even for movie editing etc., modern applications are optimised for 4 core CPUs. Then, of course, there's the multitasking.

I was hoping to point out that you can go with a cheap E3300 now and focus on the SLI card since many of these Socket 775 mobos can run quad core chips.

The ASUS P5QL is running with a QX9650 today and here are some initial results.

wPrime 1024M:
QX9650 @ 3.66Ghz - 387.941
QX9650 @ 3.00Ghz - 473.851
E3300 @ 3.00Ghz - 948.12

Obviously, the Intel quad core is faster.

WIN 4 Bibbax.

[TheGreatSatan]

The word Celeron just bugs me. It could be a Quad Core Celeron and I still wouldn't get one.