I remember in around 2007 at work we used socket 478 celeron 2 ghz chips. I was able to buy used p4 1.8 northwood chips for €2,50, this was such a massive upgrade. Idle (just often used programmes running) CPU usage went from 50-70% to 5-10% and the system chugged a lot less.
Ooooh good idea! Yeah benchmark data is gone, although I'm sure there was some at some point what ever site had it must have fallen out. Might be on way back machine though I didnt check with that. I have a stack of CD burner drives IDE so I'm thinking of building my 478 that's the worst one and selling off the rest since they're actually worth more than newer dell mobos which are way faster and work with newer OSes. and it'd be nice to have a floppy drive on hand to test out floppy games see if the data still works. I love how much aluminum was used on 478, if you clamp these to newer CPUs they cool more than the newer stock blocks. I had one on a 775 for awhile We went for 24fps back then, sometimes anyways. So that company may have been referring to that with the car game with their specs.
Yeah, better sticking with 98 and pre 98 games with a cpu that slow. They run the games too fast even at that point you need a CPU limiter. Depends on the graphics chip you have as well though. They're quite good for 90s games but as you moved to content passed their release year they would definitely struggle.
@@Bawkr They struggle even in UT99 with 7 bots, the fps can drop down to 30fps from time to time, P4 at the same clock makes a huge difference. I even tried to overclock it some time ago and to get close to the performance of P4 @ 2GHz you need at least 2.8-3 GHz which is crazy.
@@patrickc8007 Damn. Didn't think it would be that bad, I had to cpu limit a AMD Turion I think it was in order to play resident evil but now some one has ported the game to win10 so I don't really have a lot of need for 98 rigs anymore except this stack of IDE DVD burner drives I have & maybe for testing floppys. Hung onto them because I had some drives die in the past with little to no use.
Ah not a Turion. Athlon XP 2500+, just booted it up. Used to have a 6800 Ultra in it, man that thing was beyond over kill for win98 content. Turion was my hp laptop that burned itself up over its short lifespan.
Ah not a Turion. Athlon XP 2500+, just booted it up. Used to have a 6800 Ultra in it, man that thing was beyond over kill for win98 content. Turion was my hp laptop that burned itself up over its short lifespan.
I used a 2.4ghz Celeron in a Dell Inspiron 5100 laptop, upgraded to a 1.8ghz P4, so much difference. the celeron was so uniformly slow that it chugged doing anything due to it's low cache, it didn't matter what task, even general usage of XP. and on top of that since the cpu was always maxed out the heat output was ridiculous especially for such an unusably bad CPU. this was the era they used desktop CPUs, so having 60w constant heat turned into a problem real quick if you didn't have it sat on the right surface. truly one of the worst generations of cpu from Intel tbh...
hi guys, i understand the comments and that the cache really holds the celeron back, but how do you think about a l478 celeron with 2ghz for a win98 build?
i haaaaaaaated the 478 platform almsot as much as 775 . like you can have two boards that use the exact same chipset and one of them will be fsb gimped in some way
For ease of mounting and dismounting, all 478 coolers are bad. There are some good performing ones but if you're looking for one to benchmark a bunch of CPUs with, thermaltake's P4 spark 7 is about the easiest. It's still a 2-clip design but the clips are better. Ultimately Intel just released a crappy solution.
