which will perform better: a 1.4ghz Tualatin Celeron w/ 256k cache, 100mhz FSB -or- a 1.0ghz Coppermine Pentium with 256k cache, 133mhz FSB Argue for your limitations and sure enough, they're yours.

Celeron is a little faster.... Lider

It is?? ASUS A7N8X-X Athlon XP 1800+ 8.5 x 200MHz 1024MB PC3200 2.5-3-3-7 Asus A9550GE/TD 128MB WinME/WinXP Pro SP1

No the Pentium 3 is. If you are basing the 2 on MHz speed alone then you may need to rethink that. The Pentium 3 has a larger FSB then the Celeron and the larger bus side is more important then the MHz itself. That Celeron would have to be at least a 1.GHz nearly 600mhz faster then that Pentium 3 to be able to start to notice a performance increase overall over the Pentium 3 GHz. On avg Celerons 500 or 600mhz slower in overall performance compared to a Pentium 4 running at the same speed. Even the Celeron DO doesn't fair that much better then a Pentium 4. If you wanted the same performance out of a Pentium 4 GHz from a Celeron D GHz you would have to overclock that Celeron DO to at least or 3.GHz. Celerons are budget processors and that's it. they aren't made to handle a lot of work other then your have spread sheet programs. Here is another reason why FSB is more important then MHz speed..... Case in point, comparing the Athlon 64 3200+ to a Pentium 4 3.GHz ax. Even though the Athlon 64 3200+ runs normally almost 1200mhz slower then the Pentium 4 3.GHz, the FSB is one of the biggest reasons why the Athlon will outperform the Pentium 4 in a lot of apps especially when it comes to graphics and hard accelerations.

http://www.tomshardware.com/cpu/20020903/index.html ASUS A7N8X-X Athlon XP 1800+ 8.5 x 200MHz 1024MB PC3200 2.5-3-3-7 Asus A9550GE/TD 128MB WinME/WinXP Pro SP1

Nice link Jam. I was surprised that a Coppermine of the same clock would be that fast compared to a Pentium4. But already been there I looked here: http://www23.tomshardware.com/index.html I think that's more accurate even with the tualatin celeron only being 1,3GHz. Surprising is that the Celeron was even faster at DivX but slower at some other things like 3DMark 03 for example. As I see it it depends much about the use which will be faster! BTW: I didn't check all tests!!!