I have a bit of a soft spot for the III-S. In early 2002, I was looking to upgrade from a P2-233. The P4 2.2 had just been released, and I think AMD had the 2000+ Athlon XP at the time. Both great processors, but I just had to build something a little less mainstream, so I chose the PIII-S. I overclocked mine to 1575MHz and paired it with 1GB of memory, a 160GB HDD, and an Audigy sound card. Playing host was a mainboard based on the Apollo Pro 266T chipset. Well over budget, I had to cheap out on the video card, so I used an MX440 for a year. Then in 2003, I went all out and sprang for the Radeon 9800 Pro. Man, that PIII-S was my main system until late 2005!
Something I wanted to look into, but ran out of time. The Pentium III-S is more a workstation type CPU? Like a Xeon these days? Because I believe most PCs for the general public, they went straight from a 1 GHz Pentium III to a Pentium 4. Like Aldi for example, I like using them as a time period reference.
Yeah, the "S" processors were intended for server use. The standard desktop Tualatin only had 256K of cache and wasn't much faster than the Coppermine EB, clock-for-clock. The cache latency on the desktop version was also a bit higher, similar to a Coppermine. Interestingly, the mobile Tualatin had the full 512K, and laptops based on them were real screamers! I wonder why Intel only chose to handicap the desktop processors.
Probably because the release of the Pentium 4 was close and pretty much a failure. Especially the earlier Socket 423 ones with 256kb L2 and not much higher clock than the Tualatin.
It's worth mentioning that you can pin mod the Taulatin to make it work with most motherboards, just remove three pins and bridge two wires :) works well with Via 133 Apollo boards for instance
I bought one of the modified III-s Tualatins from South Korea. Though my Slot 1 motherboard supports 133Mhz FSB and runs just fine at 1200Mhz (133x9) on my VIA C3 it will not run the Tualatin at 133 FSB. This is using an MS-6905 slotket for both. Just something to keep in mind.
LOL I can remember doing that back in the day with a 1.2Ghz Celly Tualatin on an Abit SE6 Rev 2 and then overclocking it to 1.6Ghz for the rest of it's life. I can remember these Tualatins were outperforming the first P4's at that time in games.
Very close on the pronunciation of Tualatin there. A lot better than most other channels. These architectures are difficult to pronounce from just reading them, so here’s a handy guide: Tualatin: “two all a tin” Deschutes: “duh-shoots” Willamette: “Will am it” They’re named after locations in Oregon, US.
Interesting, you bought it before it was actually available, that's nice, tell us more. First generation of PIII - Katmai, was launched in 1999. Tualatin was launched in mid 2001, and the 1400 model was launched only in 2002, yet, somehow, you bought it in late 90s...
There is one other option. There is an adapter to allow Tualatins to fit in slightly older sockets. You will need to mod your cooler because you are adding the thickness of another socket and you'll want the heatsink to clip on the socket on the motherboard. Once a relative finds a Dell PC I built for them around that time, I can show you. I had to get such an adapter to put the 1.4GHz Tualatin in it. It has a Voodoo card in it too so I hope they find it someday. It should be in their basement somewhere. Awesome video! Of course, follow it up with a comparison to the first gen P4 and/or Athlon.
Especially with some of the early P4 era Celerons as well. I used to have a 2.4GHz Celeron which I overclocked right up to 3Ghz pretty stable and 3.2Ghz with some issues. Used to game on it back in the 2000s.
A 1400 Tualatin with full 512k cache is around a 1.7-2.0 GHz Pentium 4 depending on the test. The P4 with RDRAM will got alot of bandwith with it, but the long pipeline lows it down alot (except for stuff that can keep it filled, like video rendering) Beating even 2.4-2.6 GHz Celerons in some situations. With oc to 1575 MHz (150 FSB, easy to reach on good boards) and we are talking serious buissness.
Even when the code had been optimized for the P4, the Tualatin, Coppermine and AMD's Thunderbird and Thoroughbred beat the P4 quite well. You really had to set it up right for the P4 to win. Video editing was pretty much never benchmarked before the P4, as it was one of it's strong points. Until the P4 hit 3GHz it just wasn't worth it. The AMD chips were faster and burned less power, the older Intel chips were essentially killed off early so the P4 could keep going. Intel doctored the Tualatin core and created the Pentium M, later the Core Solo, Core Duo and Core 2 Duo, eventually leading to Nehalim and the Core ix line. The big reason we have the Core lineup now is that the P4 wasn't a good fit for the mobile world. Intel also realized near the end of the P4's life that the next generation of the P4's heat production and power requirements would be ridiculous. It sounds like they had 5GHz P4, maybe even dual core prototypes, but power consumption was obscene compared to the performance they were getting out of the Core Solo.
I'll see what I can dig up. I owned all of the processors I mentioned above and then some. It is rather hard to find benchmarks from 17 years ago though. The video editing thing was hoot. FlaskMPEG was recompiled with an Intel optimized compiler and it improved AMD's performance more than the Pentium 4. Still have a copy of both versions of that program on file here.
I still have a few of the Pentium 3s and the Celeron variant. I found delidding them a good way to get them to work with old school heat sinks. I remember bringing my dual P3 to Lan parties back in the day and getting all excited.
Impressive results...I didn't expect such a big performance boost comparing it to the 1000EB coppermine! It would be very interesting to see performance against early P4 cpu's also.
As far as I can remember the PIII-S absolutely destroys the early P4 CPU's in many many benchmarks and tasks. Especially ones that weren't memory sensitive. Not 100% sure about this but I believe the Pentium III-S was more tuned for application in mobile systems in a time when the 'Banias' Pentium M's weren't quite ready for market and the Pentium 4 hadn't a good mobile counterpart yet. (If there were any good Pentium 4 M's, those were always a joke.) About the Pentium M, it was heavily based on the PIII architecture and included the good elements of the P4. A really streamlined CPU.
I was given a laptop with a Pentium M 755 (2.0 GHz). The Machine felt highly streamlined: fast boot time, with applications feeling very responsive. Amazed how well the architecture performs even to the point of competing well with AMD's Athlon 64 depending on the workload. Some nostalgia if anyone's interested: www.anandtech.com/show/1399
The Intel Pentium III-S at 1.4Ghz and with the 512KB cache will really put some hurting on even the 2.0Ghz P4s despite lacking SSE2 in those early days no different from how AMD's 1.4Ghz Athlon was also able to do the same... You can see why Intel made a particular chipset requirement which meant locking out the PIII motherboards from Intel that had RDRAM which would have further exposed something weak about the P4s which was actually exposed by the mainstream PC media when they used the Intel Pentium-M (essentially a hidden PIII architecture) meant for mobile solutions as a desktop CPU... Not saying that Netburst and P4s were bad but the story was that P4s were supposed to get faster when they hit higher clock speeds beyond 3.2Ghz and arguably even the 3.7Ghz which were P4s that were also locked out of running on Dual Channel RDRAM motherboard set ups... because RDRAM did have higher performance the higher the CPU clocks and smaller die shrinks allowed.
Just got my first P3-S 1.4GHz from EBAY, wasnt cheap. Modded it with the korean guy PCB and put it in Asus P3B-F with MS-6905 slotket. FSB to 150MHz (clock speed 1570MHz), 512MB memory with 2-2-2 timings, Geforce 5900XT and yes, ~11400 from 3DMark01. I can run Doom3 and Flatout2 with it. And if I want some DOS gaming then I just swap multiplier unlocked P2-300 (Klamath) in and clock it to 2x66=133MHz. :)
no...it doesn't. I have both the PIII S 1.4ghz and a 1.4ghz P4. Difference comes down to ram speed. P4 uses RAMBUS, makes about 10% difference in favor of the P4. And, I made sure to use the same winxp pro os, 1gb of ram, and same GeForce 3 (vanilla) cards, both use SB Live! and IDE HDDs by Seagate with 80gb storage. So minus the chipsets, and cpus and ram, that's as identical as they get without expensive crossover boards for the ram/chipset
I was about to say the same. Phil, I'd love to see a part 2 of this video comparing the Tualatin 1.4 against the Athlon Thunderbird 1.4, an early Athlon XP and some Willamette Pentium 4's.
I used a tualatin p3s 1400 with a cuv4x mobo until my phenom II upgrade in 2010! This processor was incredibly ahead of its time. Paired with newer gpus like a geforce FX you could walk distances with it.
I have a Tyan dual socket 370 motherboard with two 1.4 ghz, it is rocksolid. It also has 4 x 512mb pc133 sd-ram installed! Also have a Gigabyte dual 370 motherboard with dual 1.26 ghz. One thing I love with the Tyan motherboard, with the latest bios update it supports IDE-harddrives larger than 120gb. All way up the last IDE drive, 750gb. I don't remember the model numbers, but I love dual cpu systems.
The Tyan mother is a Tyan S2507T (Tiger 230T) It uses the VIA Apollo Pro133T chipset. And the Gigabyte motherboard is a GA-6VTXD and it uses the same kind of chipset too.
LellePrinter82 that tyan system was THE shit back then. i had a 1ghz thunderbird at the time and always dreamed of a tyan dual cpu board. You have a real cool piece of PC history there, i think.
I'm jealous. That sounds like an awesome system to play with. I wonder how it compares to a low end core duo laptop? The Yonah based T2050 @ 1.6ghz must be pretty close?
And the best is, I found the Tyan motherboard years ago in an old pc case from the dumpster. I would've loved to own a Dual Pentium Pro system too. Right now I have a single Pentium Pro 200mhz System, with 128mb of edo ram.
ah yes .. the holy grail of my old company :-D when i started there, we all had 1.4GHz P3 Dell desktops ... then, some of us were getting the P4 2GHz+ machines (dont remember the speed, but was with HT)... after a while we noticed a huge performance impact on the P4s ... so we had some official statement from company "X" that their app runs best on P3 with the short pipeline ... so all good at the end and we could keep our P3s..
There's a guy on eBay that sells these that has them mounted to a PCB that makes them compatible with more motherboards. I bought two for my Asus dual Pentium 3 motherboard and they worked right out of the box, though they don't show up in the Bios as the right processor but they work great. I'm now running Windows XP great with dual Tualatin. That machine is a beast.
I do have a powerleap for a tualatin celeron. But no this is what i got on ebay. www.ebay.com/itm/Intel-Tualatin-Pentium-IIIs-1-4GHz-512K-include-On-chip-Socket-Adapter/281238323137. It's a PCB mounted under the cpu that makes the cpu like 1mm thicker. Basically it mods the pins to make it work in older socket 370 motherboards.
i have an asus CUV4X-DLS which is like the CUV4X-D, just with SCSI (i think)... sadly only with 2x 1 ghz coppermine at the moment but i will upgrade to 1.4 tualatins in the future
Damn, the more i watch your videos, the more i lust for a high end PC from my late childhood. I already have a 5820k/32gb/GTX970 for recent stuff and Q9550/4gb/GTX650 for XP stuff...maybe some day they'll be accompanied by a PIII-S 1.4/512mb/Ti4600 98SE PC.
The first time I built a Tualatin 1.4GHz and put a reasonable graphics card in it (Geforce 2 MX I think), I was blown away. I actually built computers for a living back in the day, and I just don't remember anything that smooth at the time.
It seems ok. Are you sure you aren't thinking of the TNT2 M64? The GeForce 2 MX 400 was not top of the line. But it is way better than what I had back in the day!
Geforce 2 MX was the most rebranded video card ever until the Geforce 8800 series, and then AMD R9 290x (which is still planned for another re-release as the RX 580X!)
:\ i don't have any pentiu... oh wait, i still have my pentium 2 i think. 400mhz. used to run it at 533mhz, even ran it at 600mhz for a good 6 months. aside from that, it's all athlons for me. except for that one pentium 4 3ghz HT that i bought recently. and for my 2009 laptop, which is a pentium dual-core. but that doesn't count since it's just a gimped core2duo, not a real pentium.
Oh man...so glad I bought this setup (mobo/cpu) back in the day. Got the CPU for $10 USD and the mobo for $40. Mobo I ended up with was a DFI board CT64 I think. 2006 was a good year to buy older stuff. Been working on my own benchmarking stuff, but after Phil mentioned the ram deal, finding board that support DDR for the AMD and P4 and PIII systems can be a challenge.
I was lucky enough to get a p3 1ghz that overclocked to 1.13 Tualatin speeds. I had to have a 1.4 T and got one to o/c to 1.7 and I was in heaven for many years. I still have the computer and am thinking about setting it up as a retro gaming PC.
The Tualatin would probably win, because it has double the L2 cache of T-bird and Cu-mine. The P4 Willy would be quite a bit slower than both, because having a 20-stage pipeline compared to 11 would more than cancel out the 400Mhz clock speed bump. We should all just let the Pentium 4 die, it was a dingleberry on the butthole of history!
I have a 933 Mhz Coppermine with a Tualatin compatible board. There was a listing for one on ebay for 10€, but I missed it... damn, I really should have gotten it. Thx for the video!
It would be nice to see a test of Tualatin PIII-S 1400MHz on motherboards with different chipsets like: i440BX / i815 / i820 / VIA 694T / ALiM1651T / SiS630ET. My guess is that intel 440BX would win that competition ;)
Hi Phil, you don't technically need a Tualatin compatible chipset. I'm using one with a slot-based Asus P3B-F 440BX, using a slotket that has been modded. It's quite easy to mod. I can go from a P2 233 @ running 133 to the 1.4 Tualatin-S, crazy! And with ISA for sound as well
It does overclock the FSB however it runs just fine, and the PCI clock is correct as there is a divider for it in the BIOS but AGP bus is slightly overclocked. My Geforce 5900 works just fine with it though. The slotket I used is very cheap, they are available from Germany for 5 Euro - MSI 6905. You can either mod the socket side or get one of the adapters that fits onto the CPU side instead, either way it's quite easy to do if you google Tualatin pin mod you should find the info
I had a p3 Tualatin with a Radeon 9550.I remember being able to oc like 75 MHz out of it because I was using a mobo not able to lock the PCI /agp bus frequency so things got unstable pretty fast. This thing was extremely fast, it wasn't an a64 but it worked very well, the CPU so fast that it outperformed every atom setup up until the Pineview core, excepting setups with Nvidia ion.
I have a CUSL2_C that also can't lock PCI/AGP, still got it running on 150 FSB, which puts the PCI to 37 MHz and the AGP to 74 MHz. Still stable. Got my P3 933 up to 1050 MHz that way.
HappyBeezerStudios - by Lord_Mogul in my case I could oc higher only if I used on-board audio(which was a shitty ac97 Realtek), otherwise the sound card would freeze when raising the PCI clock.
I had a 1.2 GHz Tualatin Celeron to upgrade from my Pentium II 300Mhz cpu. I purchased the Celeron together with a slot cassette adapter so it could fit into the slot of a Pentium 2. My PC came to life again in a crazy way! Best CPU upgrade ever. Well, maybe together with my Kingston upgrade chip which was based on the AMD 5x86-133 Mhz cpu, to upgrade my Intel 486-66 Mhz cpu. That was also one bloody good upgrade. Sigh, where are the days...
I already had a Celeron Tualatin 1.4 GHz, it was the best Celeron I ever had. The Celeron D I have not even close to the performance I had with Tualatin.
Still remember using a Celeron D 2.4GHz. The computer felt a lot slower with it than it did the Pentium III 667 in my previous machine (which was upgraded from a Celeron 433)
The Celeron D is the worst CPU I know of. It is so extremely slow that even the slowest pentium 4 outperforms a 3GHz Celeron D. I still don't understand the naming scheme, because the D would suggest it's a slower/crippled version of the Dual core Pentium D, but it isn't
I would naively have predicted about a 40% performance delta, and it certainly looks like that's about right, with a few outliers. Nice beast, that P3!
That Aussie weather must be really good for electronics, the brackets of video cards turns dull only after a year over here in Malaysia thanks to the nasty humidity.
What a piece of beautiful hardware !!! On my first pc i had a p3 at 600MHz but i was too young to understand which model it was... nice processor which gave me hundreds hours of playing games
I remember my very first PC I built myself had a 1.0 GHz Pentium III, 256 mbs of pc133 ram, 32 mb nvidia geforce 2, 20 GB hard drive, and ran Windows Me. I remember that I built in March of 2001. Then before I sold it, I remember I upgraded it to Windows XP.
Your first build sounds very similar to my 2nd build; had it long enough for most of its original components to died: P3 1Ghz Gigabyte 815 MB (which died and had to find an ASUS replacement) 256MB SDRAM ATI RAGE 32MB (died and replaced by Geforce 2 MX400 64MB) 20GB HDD (died and replaced with a Maxtor 80GB) Creative SB Vibra (died and replaced by Creative SB Live 24bit - 0410) Liteon 52x CD ROM (blew up one CD, then died sometime later, replaced by ASUS DVD-CDRW Combo drive)
I remember at the time, if you had a large budget, you could get a 1.5 Ghz Pentium 4 system with 256 mb of rdram. Of course my desktop build I have now still isn't new today, but kindof modern. Has an Intel Core i7-4770k cpu, 16 GBs of ddr3 ram at 2400 mhz, and an EVGA NVidia gtx 1060 6 GB ftw2+ graphics card and a 275 GB crucial ssd with a 3 TB seagate hdd. I think most of my components are from around 2013, I guess still good enough though to run the latest games and stuff.
There is couple of better Pentium 3s in the form of the Pentium M as they got the Tualatin core with some more modern features and they clock higher while being cheaper.
@@TheGodOfBlocks Same execution core while the floating point unit and other things were new. You can read what exactly was changed in articles posted online.
I really wanted one of these after seeing a PC manufacturer paired these with DDR RAM for their top tier machines but the whole system was $2200 without a monitor.
a friend of min has a re-capped abit bp6 with a couple of the 1.4ghz celeron Tualatin chips in adapters, water cooled, and overclocked as far as the chip would go(the board will do 165mhz fsb with the other chips we have put in it...that were replaced... its genuinely amazing for its era... destroys any pentium-d you compare it to... the cpus and adapters cost him a good bit, but...he wanted to try it and the site that sold him the combo guariteed it would work.. they had the p3 full version but suggested the celeron ver since it wasnt much dif, if i remember correctly the only dif in the case of the models he got, was fsb being 100 by default rather then 133... but 1.4ghz by default so higher default multi....heh... these were sort of like the k6-3 of its day... you didnt see them for sale alot... but people who had them loved them... (i had a few friends with the k6-3 that got 600-650 out of them...one of our friends removed the lid and made a shim at his fathers work... he got 750 out of his using a swiftech cooler.... the risk of breaking a core was high...he killed 2 k6-2 before getting the shim correct...
I was going through my old scrap pc's that I collect.. because well for this reason.. found a duel Pentium 3-s machine thing was pulled out a dumpster if I remember right pretty cool!!
BTW I made a dual tualatin 1.4 GHz system run skyrim. I had to remove the SSE2 instructions in ollydbg, and for some super strange reason, the game still runs even with those instructions removed (it shouldn't work, but it does). Probably really bad EXE optimization. It crashes about once every half hour, but gets like 20-25 fps. Video card was HD 4650 (second fastest AGP).
Another great video Phil! I think that I would get an Athlon 64 or a core2duo, since the Tualatin motherboards lack ISA slots. I am stuck with coppermine for the time being, but it's great to see this CPU tested here!
I still have a 1,266GHz P3-S and an Asus TUSL2-C Mainboard, which I will reassemble again after your inspiration :-) . Have you ever had a Pentium-M, running with the Asus CT-479 on a Socket 478 Mainboard? That's my other retro-PC-rig, overclocked from 1,73GHz to 2,4, running great on Windows XP for a very long time...
Daniel Tekmyster I had three Amiga1200's over the years and two Amiga600's. One of the 1200, had a GVP Turbojaws II accelerator card, surf squirrel controller and I sold it for 25 US Dollars more than 12 years ago. It was stupid of me, yet the machine was worth nothing at that time. Thats how things are in life.
Pentium III S was legendary. It was so good that it was quite obvious that, from the beginning, the Netburst Design was a dead end road. Overclocked PIII-S destroyed the Willamette Pentium 4 CPUs. PIII-S lost against the Northwood ones. However, you had to consider that it lacked SSE2, it lacked the quad pumped FSB, it lacked fast Ram and it lacked the enhanced data prefetch unit. It was obvious that developing the P6 architecture would have been the better choice. And the proof came a bit later with the mobile Pentium-M. At the beginning, Intel still pushed the myth that high clockability of the NetBurst would give them an advantage. But when the first desktop motherboard for the Pentium-M came out and the overclocked Dothan Pentium-M destroyed everything, including the P4 Extreme Editions, Intel couldn´t hide the truth any longer. The final nail in the coffin of Netburst was the throtteling of the extremely hot running Prescott CPUs (3rd Generation Netburst).
The Tualatin was always expensive and hard to find even new. Motherboard compatibility was a problem as well. I had the P3 1Ghz and it worked well for years until I went to the P4 Prescott. Totally skipped the Willamette because the Prescott kept my room warmer in the Winter time. lol
I just rewatched this video cause I wasn't sure if I needed a better graphics card for win98 or a better cpu. I have a GF2Ti on a 1000EB system with a VIA 133T chipset motherboard (GA-6VTXE). I also have an FX5900XT and I compared both cards and found out that the GF2Ti is faster in low resolutions but the FX5900XT is way ahead in resolutions like 1280x1024 and in some games in 1024x768 too. So I realized that the FX is severely bottlenecked by the cpu, hence I definetely need this tualatin processor!
I'm using an AOpen ax6bc 440bx board with a Tualatin 1.4 in a modified adapter. Probably wasn't worth the cost when I could build a P4 or XP system for half the price but like you say, there's something about having the best of an era.
I just ordered a dual socket tualatin server motherboard with 2 GB RAM and two of these 1.4 ghz P3s. Dual CPU Tualatin... curious how Windows 7 runs on that.
I've just sold my Tualatin, I am really sad because of that, but I already have too much retro stuff. It's not that good as people believe, yes, it's more efficient architecture than first Pentium 4s, but it's still Pentium 3 and it doesn't have enough performance to play games from that period of time on ultra in resolution higher than 1024x768, but it's interesting piece of history.
Good job, Phil! I only wish you'd also benchmarked a 500 MHz Katmai (I still keep one such system, btw). Thus, we would have seen the performance differences over 500 MHz increments of the three revisions. An early P4 could also complete the picture, but hey, it's never enough :)
A good option is also the Pentium III-S 1266 MHz, it is alot cheaper in comparison and still got the 512k Cache and all the Tualatin benefits. But careful as there is also a 1266 MHz Tualatin with only 256k cache.
i still have my first pc that has a 1Ghz tualatin celeron on it and a AOpen MX3S-T. i got it from my school at the time, no idea why they threw it out. it was fine and they were still using that model. but hey i finally could play better games and this was somewhere around the year 2003-2005 or so.
I had a P3 1GHz back in the day, and it was a beast at the time. Being a student I was looking for a budget option to upgrade, and the prospect of just swapping out the CPU was appealing, but my Via chipset motherboard wasn't compatible with the Tualatin processors. Clearly the P4 was the way Intel was going, but P4 motherboards and CPUs commanded a pretty hefty price premium, so I just ended up going with an AMD Athlon XP 1900+ thoroughbred. My next upgrade was an Athlon 64, but I did eventually get a P4, which was a cast-off from a friend's upgrade.
simply said the Tualatin was/is A LEGEND after this CPU i was buying AMD Athlon 64 3700+ and the AMD X2 4800+ then the Core 2 Quad Q6600 continued with the I7 980 6 core and now , it looks like i will be going back to AMD after sooo many years
how come you didn't test it against the obvious? atlhon 1.4ghz [edit] well i guess it loses to the atlhon since i used to get 11k 3dmarks 2001 with mine and an overclocked ti4400 that was a bit a tiny bit slower than a stock ti4600
So the corsair vs450 psu has enough power on the 5 and 3.3 line? Im having a real problem finding a good psu for my intel815aae motherboard. It only has one 20pin for power. I would love a retro psu guide video.
@@philscomputerlab Ok so Win98se P3 933mhz (1.4ghz later) Geforce 4400t 128mb 40gb ide hdd 512mb ram Cd rom ide drive Sb live! 5.1 And a few fans ofc. I hear alot of talk about the psu power standard changing around 2002? And the focus went away from the 5v and 3.3v rails to 12v rail. I understand there should be some truth too this claim but maybe for more power hungry hardware then? Could you shine some light on this for me and the rest of us. I see there are others who wonder aswell when i do google searches.
P3 S 1.4ghz scales up nicley up to Gf4 ti 4600... P3-S is a must have/super chips for us retro maniacs. The bad things is the lack of SSE2 support and the drawbacks of the platform hence to intel favoring the P4(still we love this chip too). Tulatin 512 is the ancestor of Core line...it late became Banias..then Dothan an so goes to history.
The Pentium 3 Tualatin is indeed an amazing CPU. It's worth noticing that they can also be still be used for daily tasks even today, in 2018. I do use a Tualatin 1.40Ghz as my main machine. Let me show you a video of my machine in action: ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-7v9t8qPXmkU.html Pardon the potato quality, I know the video sucks, but I wanted to give a proof that Tualatins can still be useful today and do much more things than just play old games. :)
Many games will refuse to start on this processor due to the lack of the SSE2/SSE3/SSE4 instruction set. The multiplier is locked on Pentium III 1400, which limits its overclocking capabilities so IP4 with DDR was better choice in 2002
@@FatalityOCC I use SetFSB to overclock it, but it requires the right combination of RAM, adeguate cooling and a good PSU. You can overclock it through BIOS if you have an Asus TUV4X but you can't go beyond certain frequencies, the rest must be done with SetFSB in Windows.
Yeah, its very versatile like the athlon, in that it can run windows ME or windows 7 equally well with appropriate ram, a high end gpu (radeon x850 to be compatible for both windows versions) and a good IDE ATA133 SSD. :)
Those Coppermine Celerons actually weren't bad at all... When compared to the Coppermine P3 anyway. It was all about overclocking it, getting that half cache to operate twice as fast, along with a much higher overall clock. It was pretty common back then to have them getting P3 numbers. Which of course caused me to buy an Abit VP6 dual socket 370 board back then, ran two FCPGA Coppermine Celerons to start... Peltier cooled, then water cool TEC.... A whole additional tower sat beside the full tower case and was nothing but ATX power supplies wired together inside, with a harness coming out to run the water-cooling system, TEC's, fans, etc.... Until later on in the systems life, when I swapped the Celerons out for actual Coppermine P3's, then overclocked those with the same coolers... BUT, now without the second PSU tower, and with a stand alone bench-top 12VDC power supply... Just a black unit with an illuminated orange switch. The CPU's ran below zero most of the time, creating ice around the sockets and such. Never an issue though, was my daily computer and gaming rig, was just what I did back then. But I fondly recall this era.... My favorite era really. I did have a BP6 mobo prior to this set up, which ran two regular 370's ... The VP6 was the FC-PGA 370... which is what the Coppermine chips used, though folks seem to just refer to it as a "370", the actual socket 370 came before... And that BP6 had two of them, with a 440BX chipset which Abit somehow worked SMP out on... Using Windows 2000, which was just in time for all of this, was ideal... It was an NT based OS, so it knew how to use more than one CPU, and waaaay before multi core cpu's, or hyper-threading... I had a task manager that showed me two CPU charts... Was great. Had that working with two original socket 370 Celerons, which changed throughout the systems life, also TEC cooled, then water cooled. That whole cooling system began with the right before the BP6 actually, and then grew to a dual system for it... and lasted all the way thought the VP6 life... Years of service, with a home made water cooling kit that cooled thermal electric coolers... Which had a transmission cooler for the radiator, mounted to the top of a custom made full tower case, which was painted bright yellow with black accents... automotive paint, HVLP sprayed. Had the rad mounted up top with a CNC machined grille setup... It was nice. This whole time period was just the best time to be doing this stuff. Before it was all able to be store bought and slapped together by any 8 year old kid with just a Best Buy in the mix. The ingenuity, the wild ideas and executions. The hardware. This is why I like your channel as well, you have a way of allowing me to relive most of this era, and to play with hardware I never had... in a way, anyway. So keep it up man, you've got quite a good thing happening here.
You should try to build a Scoket 479 Pentium M PC (yes, there are standard mATX and ITX desktop motherboards for the mobile Pentium and Celeron M), and see how does it compares to the 1.4 GHZ Tualatin PIII and a P4 of the same era.
Pham Nguyen Duc Tin yeah the Pentium 3 based mobile CPUs were much better than the p4 chips and that is why the core line did not add onto the p4 architecture but rather use the Pentium m for reference because of its lower power consumption and better performance per MHz
Nils Pc Vids yes inded the Pentium Pro derived into PII & PIII... this design was used as the foundation for the core lineup wich is what Intel evolved up to the current CPUs 😊
This was the best chip intel ever made IMHO. It had all the technology inside we needed to build up on it but then intel started to using their netburst architecture.. *sigh* A P III-S can whoop the but off the whilamette P4 easily. Still using my old Dell C600 with P III-M 750Mhz and it performs pretty well. Love playing Bejeweled 2 on it xD
@@philscomputerlab Yup and netburst can go a long way too. I know someone who still uses a Dell Dimension 9150 with a Pentium D as a serious daily driver PC and the only thing upgraded was OS to win 7 and ram to 4gb.
Intel called it "815E", released at 2000. Had it's time in cafes at late 2000's, "the cheapest machines to play crappy korean online games" (until SSE2 was a requirement).
first sentence was about chipset. i815E was a revision of i815. You can notice this difference if the motherboard supports ATA100 or not, added with this revision.
yeah SSE2 killed old cpus like pentium iii or athlon xp... most games need it for at least a decade already and since a few years even web browsers and other basic programs require it.
Phil the board compatibility is way better than you mention. You do not need any new chipset revision or such. It was an artificial barrier made by Intel to force people to upgrade boards. In reality, you can easily do a mod on the CPU (you remove few pins and connect others its easy to google the procedure) and Tualatin will work in any s370 Coppermine motherboard (or slot1 motherboard using coppermine adapter, but please note the adapter has to have voltage switches on it, as leaving it on CPU it would heavily overvolt cause the board would not understand the voltage the Tualatin is asking for). Powerleap and others also made adapters in socket370 on for slot1 usage, they are common on ebay. just search for "tualatin adapter" so you can also use those so you don't have to modify the CPU at all. The slot1 one more rare and expensive, but as I mentioned you can use the s370 one and just use an common coppermine to slot1 adapter with it. Im using Tualatins in many retro computers, I use the P3 1,4 in I820 slot1 and I use the Celeron 1,4 in the BX boards. I run them overclocked to 1,6-1,7 which is what those chips usually do, and those are the best performing native ISA slot systems you can build. There is also K7 option on VIA KT133 with ISA, but I never liked the VIA chipset cause of their compatibility and performance issues and the Barton there I run at 2,2Ghz by unlocking the multiplier, but it barely competes with the Tualatin at 1,7Ghz cause is horribly limited by the slow FSB and Sdram bandwith of the KT133, yet it eats and heats like a truck so I prefer the Tualatin any day.
Tualatins are also extremely durable, its hard to kill them. I never managed to kill one. They can take voltage way out of specs and just keep going. Highest Iv ever tested was 2,4v and it lived. The default is 1,45v and ideal for peak OC is between 1,6-1,75, but they can run even higher and yes they will start to heat up a lot but they will survive. I have some very old slot1 BX boards that do not support Coppermine, cause their voltage controller delivers 0 when the CPU asks for less than 1,8-2v, aka those boards are only for the 2V slot CPU's, but the tualatin there overvolted to 1,8v works, and the slot1 coppermines don't heh. The Tualatin Celerons just survive everything, and overclock nicely, they are really good CPUs. The only one that was a bit picky was the Celeron 1400. Some of the most ancient boards do not work on the 14x multiplier, but the 1300 model worked fine. They usually also do 112 FSB as their top, which translates to 1456Mhz in system that originally supported max 600Mhz P3 Katmai core.
Just out of curiosity what's with that short brown colored expansion slot at the bottom of the motherboard? I got an old Soyo AMD Socket A board with a similar slot that I have no idea about its purpose.
I like collecting these parts as I like to tinker with these old machines and there is a seller on ebay in the US selling these cpu's for $18.99US with free shipping and has 10 available..
Oh man. I had one of these on an Abit BH6 with a custom BIOS that would support it, and a Radeon 9800 XT as well as a GeForce FX 5950 Ultra to swap between. (Spoiler alert: 9800XT whupped the 5950U).
But it breaks compatibility with some games; also there’s really no need for it because the console is locked to 24fps. There is also a 128MB of RAM mod, but again what’s the point?
Today I've come through a Tualatin compatible motherboard in the trash (MSI MS-6368), along with some broken/bulging capacitor, as well as a socket with the top plastic missing from incorrect cooler. Is there a way to get the top plastic back on, and is it worth it to revive this mobo just for the sake of Tualatin, even though it has no agp slots?
PhilsComputerLab Oops my bad. I mean the top plastic of the socket is missing (the plastic that shifts to secure the cpu as well as the lever). It may have been pried off by an incorrect cooler or salty previous owner
Like someone else wrote earlier, I'd love to se a comparison between this and a P4 at 1.4GHz and a Athlon at the same speed to see how they compare. I bet AMD will win like it always does, but seeing by how much would make a great video ;)
And that's where things get tricky, as there are so many different motherboard options, chipsets, RAM standards. Fanboys come out with their pitchforks for the oddest reasons and whatnot :D But for sure, there will be something like that at some point in the future :D
Its all about chipsets there. The full fat P3 Tualatin with FSB133 and 512K of L2 is pretty strong, in period correct setup it would beat Athlon on like KT133. But if you give the Athlon Nforce 2 it will easily win. The whole K7 platform is extremely bus/memory bottlenecked and running the same CPU with low FSB and Sdram chipset vs high FSB low latency DDR chipset (like Nforce2) it can be like 60% difference in gaming according to my own tests. For example Im using Barton overclcoked to 2,2 Ghz on Abit AT7A, that is KT133 board and compared to Tualatin on 1,7 in Intel BX they trade evenly. If I put the same Barton on the same 2,2Ghz on Nforce 2 and throw it FSB200/DDR400 it becomes 60% faster. On the P4 side, P4 has the quad-pumped FSB so it has little platform bottleneck, but the CPU itself is pathetic and has low IPC. Typically The P4 platform does well on memory bottlenecked engines, like quake3, but anything CPU/FPU intensive like Unreal engine or most other games it needs like 1Ghz more to even think of competing.
2 things i might say about my next video expectations 1 celeron 1100A 1200 or latest revision of 1300 with bsel pins removed or covered would beat pentium 3 1400 at fsb133 by small margin 2 one particular via chipset equiped ecs motherboard i mentioned before can let you run pentium 3 1400 at fsb of 150mhz also it can somehow run 1,5gb of pc 133 memory at this speed so i want to see a video on "tualatin celeron upclocking" that is fulling the motherboard into thinking that celeron should natively run at higher fsb, it is mostly desirable on via chipsets , because it substituted correct fsb deviders beyound 33% oc
I just bought a 1.4 Ghz PIII and am looking to get a quieter cooler. I am currently using a stock PIII cooler, but it is way too loud. I searched for the Arctic Cooling Copper Silent 3 that you used, but it appears to be out of stock in the USA. Can you recommend any other similar quiet Tualatin-friendly coolers? Thanks.
Just picked up a GIGABYTE GA-6OXT v1.0 s370 motherboard from ebay, came with an 850Mhz celeron cpu installed, but soon to be replaced with a 1.4Ghz Tualatin cpu, i plan to pair with an ATI 9600XT/128mb video card, i figure games from late WIN98 and early XP era should run pretty smooth. Yahoo!
