Celeron 430... Wow.

Intel doesn't talk much about its Celeron processors nowadays. They are too busy pushing their Pentium Dual Core chips in budget laptops and cheap desktops. Hell, to be honest, I didn't even know Intel still made Celeron processors.

They do. And I'll be perfectly honest; They kick total ass.

I'm not just saying this either. Before I tried a Celeron 430 last week, I hated Intel. I was such an unhappy camper after using the Pentium D 805, I swore to myself I was never going to touch an Intel processor again.

And I probably wouldn't have, if I couldn't have bought one of these Conroe based Celerons for $22 on ebay (Although in all honesty, I was going to buy a Celeron 420 from NewEgg for $43).

I can hardly find any information about these processors on the internet, and that's really a damn shame considering these things have been out since June. Everybody is all about multicore chips nowadays, but the Celeron 4XX is a true single core chip.

The Celeron 4XX series isn't just a Conroe based Core 2 Duo with one of its cores disabled, its actually a true one core processor. The chips run on a 800 mhz FSB and have 512K of L2 cache. Some people on NewEgg bitch about the lack of L2 cache in their reviews, but I don't have a problem with it; my Athlon X2 4400+ only has 512K of L2 cache per core.

When I bought the Celeron 430, I was not expecting much. I bought a motherboard for $30 and figured I would only use the system to run Mac OS X over a weekend or two before I packed the CPU and board up and sold them on eBay. I figured that the performance would totally suck, and at first I actually was going to cancel the motherboard order and just try and resell the processor on eBay.

The CPU and motherboard sat unopened for about a week before I was interested in trying the processor out. I put the board in an old case with a 300 watt Antec power supply, a 1gb stick of RAM from my Athlon system, and an old 40gb IDE hard drive that contained Mac OS X 10.4.8.

After putting the system up I booted it up, and went into the BIOS. Despite being a $30 motherboard, I could actually overclock the system by setting the bus speed. The default was 200 times a multiplier of 9 which yielded 1800 mhz. For shits and giggles I set the bus speed to 260 and restarted the system. I figured the system wouldn't boot, and I would have to reset the BIOS jumper.

I couldn't believe the system booted. With no problems whatsoever, either. Boom, right out of the box my 1.8ghz Celeron was operating at 2378mhz, or as I round up, 2.4 ghz. A freaking 33% speed increase!




I was amazed by this number, especially since after several tests the system barely ran any hotter. In fact the system when 33% overclocked was still running cooler than my Athlon X2 4400 system.

Runnong OS X on the machine was totally responsive. Never before had I used an OS X machine that ran so smoothly. I bought an Intel Mac Mini Core Solo last year, and sold it within a month because the performance was horrendous. The Celeron 430 however was amazing.



It wasn't long before I installed Windows XP on the machine and did some tests. After I saw the test results, I quickly moved the Celeron and motherboard into my regular computer case and put the Athlon X2 4400+ and its board into my closet.


SuperPi



This was the test that I couldn't believe! My Pentium D 805 took a minute to calculate Pi to a million places. I was amazed when my Athlon X2 4400 did it in 39 seconds. I was completely speechless when this budget processor completed the task in 29 seconds; a full ten second lead from a processor that I paid four times as much.

Geekbench





I've come to accept the fact that Geekbench gives totally different scores on the same hardware depending on what OS is used. When Geekbench is run on the Celeron 430 @ 2.4 ghz in Windows XP, it gets a score of 2040. Not bad considering my dual core Athlon X2 4400+ manages to get a score of 2428 at stock speed (2.3ghz).

So what did I learn? I learned that Intel is still making single core processors, and that Core based CPUs really kick ass. AMD can kick the shit out of Intel's Netburst based processors, but I think they are going to have a hard time fighting off Core based processors.

I just wished I would have given Intel another chance before I bought my AMD Athlon X2 system. Damn, I could only imagine the results of an overclocked Core 2 Duo.

I'm sorry Intel.

So a while back, I bitched about Intel and how I was never going to buy another one of their processors because of the horrible experience I had with the Pentium D 805. I was really happy with my Athlon X2 4400+ system, but the problem was I just couldn't find it in myself to love Windows Vista.

Lets face it; Windows Vista is the biggest load of operating shit the world has ever seen. I thought my system with 2gb of 800 mhz DDR2 RAM would be able to run Vista, but for some damn reason Vista seemed to always want to access my hard drive (YES I TURNED SEARCH INDEXING OFF!) for some unknown reason.

I was back to using good old Windows XP but I quickly realized that I wanted to try something different. Linux was out of the question, because well frankly, everytime I install any kind of distro what so ever, it always fails to boot within a month (I do something to screw up the settings, and the window manager doesn't load, so I'm stuck with a command prompt and I'm too damn lazy to learn Linux).

Then I got this brilliant idea of using OS X on my machine. I actually owned some recent Macs in the recent years, and actually enjoy using the OS X software. My problem is I have always had a problem with the hardware. If it wasn't for the shitty hardware experience, I would most likely be using a nice iMac C2D today, but instead now I am just using OS X on generic hardware. I could write ten pages of whether its legal or not (its not legal), but I'll do that some other time.

So back to the whole OS X story. To make a long story short, OS X wouldn't play friendly on my AMD system. My onboard nVidia graphics didn't work, my sound didn't work, and a bunch of other things probably didn't work (my wireless network card did however work with a bit of tweaking).

I did some research, and it seemed that the solution was to buy a Intel processor and an Intel chipset motherboard. Mac OS X ran very nice on my Pentium D system, so I figured I would purchase a cheap Conroe based Celeron processor, and a cheap motherboard despite my new found hatred towards Intel.

I didn't realize how awesome the Core 2 platform really is. I managed to buy a Celeron 430 CPU off of eBay for a mere $20 and a Intel 945gz based Biostar motherboard off of NewEgg for $30. I took the 2gb of 800mhz DDR2 memory from my AMD system and threw it into the board (It only operated at 533mhz though.. bummer) and overclocked the processor upto 2.4ghz with no problems (I had to literally fight with my Athlon X2 4400+ to overclock it sucessfully, and I was using a somewhat expensive motherboard!)

So why am I using the Celeron 430 now instead of the Athlon X2 4400 as my main system? Its not all about me running OS X... the Celeron 430 when OC'ed is actually a pretty damn good processor that almost fully puts my dual core Athlon to shame!

More details later!

I want to update.

Geez I really want to keep up with this blog! I have a couple posts I typed up and just need to post, and I also have a shitload of new stuff to write about (including about how Intel's Celeron 430 processor kicks the shit out of my Athlon X2 4400+ in SuperPi)

Scary thought; I was logging into my Blogger account and took a minute to look at the blogs that were updated within the past minute. Amongst the updated, "Enema Erotica". I thought I was strange for writing about computer hardware..

The new system

I've had my new system for almost a month now, and I can honestly say it destroys my previous Pentium D 805 system in every aspect. I decided to go ahead and spend a little extra on this system, and in the end I am quite happy with what I got.

AMD Athlon X2 Brisbane 4400 $85
Biostar TF7025-M2 $70
2 gb of Patriot High Performance DDR2 800 memory $60 after rebate
Athenatech Micro-atx case with 270 watt Sparkle power supply $65
Samsung DVD-RW $30

All in all, I spent around $300 for everything. Not too shabby. I used the Samsung 200gb SATA hard drive and wireless card from my old system. I didn't have to worry about a graphics card because the Biostar TF7025-M2 has integrated Geforce 7025 graphics, which surprisngly weren't all that bad.

In stock configuration for being a budget PC, the system simply rocks. It scores a 2463 in Geekbench under Windows XP. With a slight overclock, the system is able to score a 2714.

In SuperPi, the Athlon 64 X2 4400+ Brisbane core caculates pi to a million digits in 40 seconds. Of course, the program doesn't take advantage of the two cores.

In Windows Vista, the system scores very high in CPU, memory, and hard drive. The onboard graphics hold the system back, but not as bad as one may think. It scores a 3.3 base score. The onboard graphics (Geforce 7025) actually score the same as a Geforce 7300 GS PCI Express card, so guess I'm stuck with a 3.3 in Vista's rating system.

More about the system, including component reviews later...

My last hoorah with the Pentium D 805

It's been a month or so since I updated this blog, and truth be told, I forgot about it. A lot has changed however in the past month. I ordered a new setup from Newegg, and now I have a pretty sweet system. (AMD Athlon X2 4400, 2 gb DDr2 800 RAM, nForce 7025 / 630a motherboard.. more on that later)

After I assembled my new system, I took my old Pentium D 805 and motherboard and put it in a old tower case I had lying around. I hooked a 40 gb PATA hard drive to it, installed a copy of Mac OS X (JaS 10.8 release) and messed around with OS X.

I used GeekBench to get scores of roughly 1600 in Windows XP with the Pentium D 805 at stock speed. After installing OS X, I decided to try GeekBench for OS X and see how it would score.

I wish I would have taken screenshots, but I guess I will just have to link to the Geekbench results.

I am so fucking amazed at the difference in scores, that I now see why a lot of people are brainwashed into still buying Pentium D processors. I mean, I get a score of 1500 in Windows Vista with the Pentium D 805 running at 2.66 ghz. For some unknown reason, the same chip gets a score of 1949 in OS X!

Curiousity finally got the best of me, and I ended up overclocking my Pentium D processor. I wasn't going to be using the system very long, so I wasn't worried about the increase in electricity, and the potential damage to my hardware.

I'm not going to bore anyone with the overclocking details, so I will keep 'em short.l. Since I was using a cheap ass PC CHIPS motherboard, I wasn't expecting much. To make a long story short, the maximum I could get the board upto was 3.33 ghz. Which isn't too bad, considering its a shitty motherboard and I was able to get a 25% speed increase.

Of course, running @ 3.33 ghz gave me a few problems. First off, I had to use a AGP graphics card (onboard video wouldn't work) and the onboard sound didn't work. I didn't have to worry about case temperature because the board was just laying in an open tower case (it was still around 60 degrees centigrade at idle.).

I booted the Pentium D 805 running at 3.33 ghz into OS X and quickly ran Geekbench. I was able to get a score of 2432; almost a 1000 higher than my Windows XP score at stock speed.

What did I learn? I learned that Geekbench on OS X gives fairytale scores when compared to the same hardware in Windows XP.

Did this change my mind about the Pentium D 805? No fucking way.

If anything it made me wonder why there are actually stupid people out there that sit around and talk about how great the processor is. (This guy swears by the Pentium D 805 processor, even stating that a machine built around one is better than a Mac Pro) Sure, I overclocked the processor, but the thing runs hot enough at stock speed. And besides, even though I got a 25% increase in speed, the thing still gets murdered by any other dual core processor line (Athlon X2, Core 2, etc).

So what did I end up doing with the Pentium D and motherboard? I was actually able to sell it on eBay for $100; the same price I paid for the motherboard / CPU on March 8th, 2007 from NewEgg. Good riddance, Pentium D.

Windows Experience Index Sucks.

If I run Windows Vista on my Pentium D 805 system with 1 gb of RAM, it reminds me of using OS X on a G4 system with 512 mb of RAM. In other words, it sucks ass. My Pentium D 805 system is rated a 2.3. This is because my 128 mb AGP 8X GeForce 6200.

For some unexplained reason, the Pentium D 805 scores a 4.6. This might not sound impressive, however as of now, Vista's rating system only goes up to 5.9. That means Vista thinks the Pentium D 805 is pretty 'tight'.

Where the hell does Vista come up with these numbers? I say it must just randomly pull numbers out of a virtual ass. I mean, a freaking 4.6? What the hell am I missing?

(I am using Windows Vista x64 btw)

I hate the Pentium D processor.

In April 2007, I decided that I was going to purchase computer components from NewEgg and assemble myself a nice dual core machine. At the time, dual core processors from both Intel and AMD were pretty expensive; the cheapest one available (and the one that best met my budget) was the Intel Pentium D 805 processor, which was priced around $80 and did not include a fan / heatsink.

I was really surprised; every computer I have built since 2000 have had an AMD processor in them, mostly due to the fact that AMD processors were powerful and much cheaper than Intel's offerings. I wanted to continue with my tradition of using AMD processors, however at the time the AMD dual core processors were simply out of my budget (which was only a couple hundred dollars for a complete system).

I've always been a budget computer user, so I wasn't really expecting much. I was however expecting the Pentium D 805 processor to be more powerful than my older Athlon 64 PC it was replacing, and I really expected it to be able to kill my Mobile Sempron 2800+ laptop.

Boy was I ever wrong.

I've tried to give the Pentium D 805 a chance; at first I thought it was my motherboard (a PC Chips) or maybe slow RAM. I got a hold of another motherboard and tried the processor, but the benchmarks don't lie; the Pentium D 805 is a horrible processor.

Now I know that the processor is old now. Actually ancient. I don't care. I can not believe how horrible this processor performs in basic tasks. It's really sad when a Mobile Sempron 2800+ laptop can keep up with a Pentium D 805.


I've used various benchmarking tools to conclude that I hate the Pentium D. It's nothing but two Pentium 4 processor dies thrown onto a board. The 2mb cache sounds impressive, but it is pretty much useless.

Geekbench;

I've used Geek Patrol's Geekbench software on the Pentium D 805 system, as well as the Mobile Sempron laptop and a couple other PCs.

The best score I managed to get on the Pentium D 805 system in Windows XP; 1585

AMD Sempron 2800+ laptop; 1118

The system that was replaced with the Pentium D 805 system; 1509

Okay, so maybe the Pentium D is a big improvement over the laptop. But the freakin' Pentium D system is barely better than the Athlon 64 system. Why did I bother to even build a new box when the difference in these two systems is almost minimal?

Geekbench lists that the expected score for a Pentium D 805 processor system is 1600, so I guess I can't blame the motherboard.

SuperPi

It takes my Pentium D 805 processor 59 seconds to calculate Pi to a million places. It takes the Mobile Sempron 1 minute and 6 seconds to complete the same task. When I saw that, I didn't even want to see what my old Athlon 64 could do; it's probably a freaking supercomputer compared to the 805.

Overclocking.

I don't want to hear about how I can overclock the shitty Pentium D 805. I've read all about that ever since I bought the horrible thing, and I know why. If I wanted to spend the money in the components to OC the proccessor (better motherboard, great fan, power supply, etc) I would have just bought a better processor to begin with. Besides the Pentium D uses enough power and produces enough heat at 2.6 ghz.

I've done every freaking thing in the world to try and make my Pentium D 805 system a great dual processor system. I've changed motherboards, added RAM, graphics cards, etc. I just find that the Pentium D 805 proceesor is a pile of garbage.

I hate Intel. They can suck it. I gave them a chance, and they blew it. I don't care about their Core 2 Duo processors and how amazing they are. They deserve to be shot for releasing such a shitty dual core processor. I guess they really were trying to kill the Pentium brand image.