> Lots of performance reviews have found that a 333MHz Celeron, with 128K of L2 cache running at 333MHz, turns in performance almost equivalent to a 333MHz PII with 512K of L2 cache running at 166MHz. The higher speed of the L2 cache mostly makes up for the smaller amount of it, and the newer Celerons with integrated cache have been only just behind their Pentium II brethren at the same clock speeds, performance-wise.

Even when running extremely processor-intensive stuff? I have the unfortunate habit of maxing-out my system resources, and I've been a touch worried about the extreme slow-down the original Celerons had when you were really pushing them. I suppose the 128k cache should eliminate a lot of that problem, but I still would expect a significant drop between the amount I can push a PII and the amount I can push a Celeron.

> > > > Dar "Font of pointless babbling" ien
> > >
> > > Iss "font of Times New Roman" achar
> >
> > I came *this* close (holds up two fingers) to saying that last time, but I figured the joke needed to be more firmly established first. So I figured I'd wait and get back to it if you didn't beat me to it (which, obviously...)
> >
> > Dar "I'll get you for this!" ien
>
> Iss "that's okay; you get credit for the assist" achar

Dar "Well, I suppose that's better than nothing... I'll take it" ien