Eric Straven 0 Report post Posted September 18, 2004 Currahee, are you crazy!? It is clearly said in the Intel.com/Intel.cc website that the lowest end P4 was 1.5 GHz. The first version of the Pentium 4 was the 1.6 GHz one. I can't even imagine a 900 MHz Pentium 4 without any proof!Are you talking about Pentium III?I have two computers, ones a Pentium IV with 3.6 GHz clockspeed and 800 MHz FSB, L1 Cache: 256 KB, L2 Cache: 512 KB and L3 Cache: 1024 KB(1MB)... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
daf 0 Report post Posted September 18, 2004 Dual Athlon MP 1800+, soon converted into a Dual AthlonXP@MP 2500MHz, 768MB PC2100.Why a so "unbalenced" poll? 4 Intel CPUs vs a generic AMD brand? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
chronogamer28 0 Report post Posted September 18, 2004 I personally believe that if Intel goes higher than 3.7GHz, they are going to have to upgrade to Pentium 5 class Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
currahee 0 Report post Posted September 18, 2004 Currahee, are you crazy!? It is clearly said in the Intel.com/Intel.cc website that the lowest end P4 was 1.5 GHz. The first version of the Pentium 4 was the 1.6 GHz one. I can't even imagine a 900 MHz Pentium 4 without any proof! Are you talking about Pentium III? Â I have two computers, ones a Pentium IV with 3.6 GHz clockspeed and 800 MHz FSB, L1 Cache: 256 KB, L2 Cache: 512 KB and L3 Cache: 1024 KB(1MB)... <{POST_SNAPBACK}> http://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/desktops/desktop-products.htmlNo, take a look again. The first intial Pentium 4 releases were 1.3GHz, 1.4GHz, and 1.5GHz. However, their performance is negligible compared to that of the 1.0 and 1.2GHz Pentium IIIs. You won't start seeing a lot of performance boost with Pentium 4s until you get in the 1.7+ GHz range when comparing them with Pentium III processors. As for the 900MHz, I just saw that on a star surplus ad on PC magazine. I'm skeptical about that too since it would be really useless... a P4 running at 900MHz =P Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
almoo7 0 Report post Posted September 21, 2004 Hmmmmm yeah, my cousin's processor is Pentium 4 1.3 GHz, he was bragging about his processor to me when in fact his processor is only .2 faster than me. Just a quick post to verify that there is a Pentium 4 that runs at 1.3 GHz. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nathan2004 0 Report post Posted September 21, 2004 Vote please. Then post the speed of your processor. I have an Intel Pentium 4. With a processor speed of 2.4 gigs and 333 or 400?? (can't remember) front side bus. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> I have an AMD XP 2800 box and an AMD 900 MHz box. Both running win XP and have no problems. I save some bucks by buying AMD CPUs Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
antitoxic 0 Report post Posted September 21, 2004 My CPU is AMD Atholon XP 2500+ Codename Barton ; 512mb L2 cashe. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
roninmedia 0 Report post Posted September 22, 2004 I run an old system. I only have a AMD Athlon 1.0 Ghz processor. My system is actually 4 years old but it still runs well. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
gokul1405241470 0 Report post Posted September 22, 2004 humm.. bad thing ... i can give vote only once ..here I go ..My Desktop PC -- Athlon XP 1800 .. My Laptop -- Intel Inside Centrino 1.6 Ghz ..My Pocket PC -- Intel 300 Mhz .. .. I wish i could give 3 votes ..and yeah this is tooooo bad... y is there only one option for AMD ..there are K7's .. Durons .. Athlon XP's and so on in AMD .. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
aliem 0 Report post Posted September 22, 2004 My Platform is PegasosPPC - PowerPC G3 600Mhzmy little Gateway - AMD k6-3DNowwhy in this Poll there is only i386 Architecture Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Easy1405241470 0 Report post Posted September 22, 2004 My Pc Processor is Celeron 1.4. Yes, very old but good enough for me. One negative thing is that i cann't upgrade to extreme mhz very much. I made tests when i have 1.6 Mhz and Sisoft Sandra give out many conflicts in system. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
currahee 0 Report post Posted September 23, 2004 Celeron's are very bad. I don't care about the processor speed, its performance is horrible. I mean even for a budget CPU, it only has what... 128KB of L2 cache which hinders its performance A LOTGokul- i386.... you have a 386 processor? Well my PocketPC is powered by an Intel PXA270 312MHz processor, the best there is right now (model, that is. There is a 624MHz version that only Dell Axim's have)Oh yeah while we're at it,My Laptop- Athlon XP 2200+ m (Thoroughbred 128KB L1, 256KB L2)My sis' desktop- Intel Pentium 4 2.0GHz (Northwood 16KB L1, 512KB L2)My Pocket PC- Intel PXA270 312MHzMy TI-83+- ZiLOG z80 8MHz Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
daniel151405241469 0 Report post Posted September 23, 2004 I still am using old PII 350. Although the prices are down by much and they always keep comming up with new and faster CPU. Its really hard to decide when to upgrade. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> yay i'm using that same processor, pentium II 350mhZ Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
k221405241470 0 Report post Posted September 23, 2004 P4 2Ghz@2.4Ghz-2.6Ghz(Stable till 2642 Mhz(FSB overlocking) Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ncm 0 Report post Posted September 23, 2004 Celeron 466 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
