[CLUE-Tech] Celron v. PIII on Linux

[Timothy C. Klein]

* Randy Arabie (rrarabie at arabie.org) wrote:
> In the world of Linux, or Unix in general, what are the advantages 
> of a PIII over a Celeron....assuming they both have the same clock 
> speed, FSB speed, and level 2 onboard cache?
                                ^^^^^^^^^^^^^
This won't happen, as far as I know.  I haven't paid attention as much
to the new line of Celerons, but I believe this is the only difference
between the PIII and the Celeron.  The Celeron has half the cache (128K).
The older celeron had a 66 rather 100 Mhz bus, but I *think* the newer
line has a 100 Mhz bus now.

> I'll qualify my question with a little on what apps I'll be running:
> 
> 	DB (MySQL or Postgresql),
> 	compilers,
> 	X,
> 	Office Suite (don't know which), 
> 	Gimp,
> 	apache & PHP, 
> 	email.
> 
> This will be a development/workstation box.  No games...nothing against 
> 'em, I just don't play 'em.
> 
> Are any of these apps in the Linux world written to take advantage 
> additional instruction set(s) available on the PIII (assuming that is 
> the difference between a PIII and Celeron)?
> 
> And, the reason I've limited this to Intel is I've already got the 
> Socket 370 mainboard.
> 
> -- 
> Cheers!
> 
> Randy

I don't think you will notice a heck of a lot of difference.  The
Celerons I had are the older kind, 433 and 466 Mhz.  They compare pretty
fairly to the PIII 500 I have.  They will access the disk a bit more,
and be somewhat slower than the same clockspeed PIII, becuase of the
cache issue.  If the FSB is indeed 100 Mhz on the newer one, then they
will be quit similar.

Tim
--
==============================================
== Timothy Klein || teece at silverklein.net   ==
== ---------------------------------------- ==
== "Hello, World" 17 Errors, 31 Warnings... ==
==============================================