How I Tested
Wait for VSYNC was disabled during the tests
Canopus' Supplied Pure3D II Drivers were used in conjunction with the Millennium II AGP Drivers
The Memory Clock was set at 100MHz
Quake 2 v3.14 was used; The full version of Turok was used, not the downloadable demo.
3D Gaming
Performance - Frame Rates |
||||
Quake 2 | Turok TMark | |||
Processor |
Demo 1 800 x 600 |
Demo 2 800 x 600 |
Glide 640 x 480 |
Direct3D 800 x 600 |
AMD K6 | --- | --- | --- | --- |
Intel Celeron | 54.5 | 49.3 | 103.3 | 67.3 |
Intel Pentium II | 59.8 | 57.4 | 125.2 | 87.4 |
3D Gaming
Performance - Frame Rates |
||||
Quake 2 | Turok TMark | |||
Processor |
Demo 1 800 x 600 |
Demo 2 800 x 600 |
Glide 640 x 480 |
Direct3D 800 x 600 |
AMD K6 | 35.1 | 34.4 | 86.4 | 60.8 |
Intel Celeron | 59.8 | 57.9 | 119.1 | 78.7 |
Intel Pentium II | 63.3 | 61.5 | 141.8 | 99.7 |
3D Gaming
Performance - Frame Rates |
||||
Quake 2 | Turok TMark | |||
Processor |
Demo 1 800 x 600 |
Demo 2 800 x 600 |
Glide 640 x 480 |
Direct3D 800 x 600 |
AMD K6 | 37.2 | 36.0 | 93.5 | 67.4 |
Intel Celeron | 63.1 | 61.1 | 123.4 | 88.9 |
Intel Pentium II | 65.0 | 63.2 | 160.8 | 110.6 |
The Celeron is about 8% slower than an equivalently clocked Pentium II under Quake 2 and other Glide/OpenGL/D3D games. The Celeron leaves the poor K6 in the dust, producing frame rates around 50% higher than an equivalently clocked K6 under Quake 2. It looks like Intel has a wonderful, low cost, gaming chip on their hands. Does this make up for the lack-luster Business Application performance? That's up to you, the consumer, to decide.
1 Comments
View All Comments
Remingtonh - Sunday, November 21, 2010 - link
I'm thinking since the celeron will be such a massive upgrade from my 486DX/2-66, at an attractive price, I'll go for it.I saw a nice HP Tower at frys with the 266 Celeron at a very affordable price. My question is, since it's slot-1, will I likely be able to replace it with a pentium II at a later date once prices go down? Will it be compatible?