AthlonRob wrote:

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
NotDashEscaped: You need GnuPG to verify this message

On Sun, 28 Sep 2003 02:53:38 GMT, rcm <rcm711@hotmail.com> wrote:

Both run at 100 mHz ??. If so, the Celeron is faster in most apps.  If 66
mHz for the Celeron, the P2 at 100 would be in throughput.  Cache is faster
on the Celeron as it is a CPU speed, P2 at half speed.

Whoa... most Celerons of that era have *a lot less* cache than PII's...

My money is on the PII being faster, but as somebody else said, if you can OC that Celery chip to 133MHz FSB, it would probably win.  Celery chips tend to be easier to overclock... likely (I think) to their reduced amount of cache.

IIRC the ease of OC'ing used to be attributed to the fact that the cache was on core rather than being a little way away on seperate chips (same package)