Results - 400MHz FSB Celeron in Dimension 8300

I tried the 2.2GHz/400MHz FSB rated Celeron in my Dimension 8300 tonight.
I'm not sure what Dell was thinking when they designed the particular
heatsink used in this system, but it was a chore to get those little green
retention arms to come loose. After nearly cutting myself on the heatsink
fins, I got them out. Everything else was a piece of cake.

After slapping the Celeron in, applying some fresh heatsink compound and
putting the system back together, I turned it on. Nothing dramatic
happened--it just worked. System Setup reports a 2.2GHz Celeron CPU with a
400MHz FSB speed.

What's so startling is how much *faster* the response time of the system is.
Applications finally come up almost instantly. Windows move around much
faster. In high computing load situations, it is obvious that the Celeron
isn't running anywhere near as quickly, and the smaller L1 cache is also
noticeable. I'll take that over a draggy response, though.

Also notable is the vastly reduced heat output. Even at 100% CPU load, the
fans don't hit "warp speed" any more.

Okay, I'll try a Northwood P4 and see what that does. Clock speed/FSB
suggestions?

William

Also notable is the vastly reduced heat output. Even at 100% CPU
load, the fans don't hit "warp speed" any more.

The power being drawn is also much lower. With the Prescott P4 in place, I
could easily hit 250-270 watts per the meter built into my UPS. The Celeron
at 100% load is pulling about 197, and that includes draw from the monitor,
printer, speakers and scanner.

William

"William R. Walsh" m
wrote in message news:sTkDj.79146$yE1.16320@attbi_s21...
I tried the 2.2GHz/400MHz FSB rated Celeron in my Dimension 8300 tonight.
I'm not sure what Dell was thinking when they designed the particular
heatsink used in this system, but it was a chore to get those little green
retention arms to come loose. After nearly cutting myself on the heatsink
fins, I got them out. Everything else was a piece of cake.

After slapping the Celeron in, applying some fresh heatsink compound and
putting the system back together, I turned it on. Nothing dramatic
happened--it just worked. System Setup reports a 2.2GHz Celeron CPU with a
400MHz FSB speed.

What's so startling is how much *faster* the response time of the system
is. Applications finally come up almost instantly. Windows move around
much faster. In high computing load situations, it is obvious that the
Celeron isn't running anywhere near as quickly, and the smaller L1 cache
is also noticeable. I'll take that over a draggy response, though.

Also notable is the vastly reduced heat output. Even at 100% CPU load, the
fans don't hit "warp speed" any more.

Okay, I'll try a Northwood P4 and see what that does. Clock speed/FSB
suggestions?

William



Congratulations on that interesting find.

3.0GHz or 3.2GHz Northwood should work just fine. Both are 800mhz FSB with
512 cache.

Get some fresh thermal compound if you need it.

So is it your opinion (right now) that the 3.4GHz Prescott has been the
issue the entire time?

I would be real tempted to re-install the 3.4 using fresh compound and see
what happens just for grins.

What are the odds that there was improper or inadequate thermal transfer
with the original 3.4 and the heatsink?

At the least it would confirm that the previous performance is indeed caused
somehow by the 3.4 chip.

"William R. Walsh" m
wrote in message news:sTkDj.79146$yE1.16320@attbi_s21...
I tried the 2.2GHz/400MHz FSB rated Celeron in my Dimension 8300 tonight.
I'm not sure what Dell was thinking when they designed the particular
heatsink used in this system, but it was a chore to get those little green
retention arms to come loose. After nearly cutting myself on the heatsink
fins, I got them out. Everything else was a piece of cake.

After slapping the Celeron in, applying some fresh heatsink compound and
putting the system back together, I turned it on. Nothing dramatic
happened--it just worked. System Setup reports a 2.2GHz Celeron CPU with a
400MHz FSB speed.

What's so startling is how much *faster* the response time of the system
is. Applications finally come up almost instantly. Windows move around
much faster. In high computing load situations, it is obvious that the
Celeron isn't running anywhere near as quickly, and the smaller L1 cache
is also noticeable. I'll take that over a draggy response, though.

Also notable is the vastly reduced heat output. Even at 100% CPU load, the
fans don't hit "warp speed" any more.

Okay, I'll try a Northwood P4 and see what that does. Clock speed/FSB
suggestions?

William

Hi!

I would be real tempted to re-install the 3.4 using fresh compound
and see what happens just for grins.

I already did. It made no difference. Contact between the heatsink, compound
and 3.4 seemed to be very good. I cleaned the heatsink completely anyway,
put some fresh compound down and tried again.

I also tried a larger power supply (450 watt over the 300 or so watt unit
that Dell installed) in case the system was somehow being starved for power
and running slowly as a result. That made no difference either, although the
larger supply ran somewhat cooler.

William

Hmmm.

Well it was worth a shot anyway if for no other reason but to confirm the
3.4 is 'sluggish'.

I'm assuming you've already used something like Intel's CPU id utility
simply to confirm the ID of the 3.4?

(dumb question, but I had to ask..)


"William R. Walsh" m
wrote in message news:nRlDj.26031$TT4.16579@attbi_s22...
Hi!

I would be real tempted to re-install the 3.4 using fresh compound
and see what happens just for grins.

I already did. It made no difference. Contact between the heatsink,
compound and 3.4 seemed to be very good. I cleaned the heatsink completely
anyway, put some fresh compound down and tried again.

I also tried a larger power supply (450 watt over the 300 or so watt unit
that Dell installed) in case the system was somehow being starved for
power and running slowly as a result. That made no difference either,
although the larger supply ran somewhat cooler.

William

Hi!

I'm assuming you've already used something like
Intel's CPU id utility simply to confirm the ID
of the 3.4?

I did not use an Intel utility to determine the ID of the CPU. I used
the CPU-Z tool, which has always worked well for me in the past. (It
is also not Intel specific.)

While the chip itself doesn't say "Prescott" on it (nor did I expect
it to), the printing on top clearly identifies it is an Intel Pentium
4 at 3.40GHz clock speed.

(dumb question, but I had to ask..)

Never hurts to have all the facts.

William

Hi!

Get some fresh thermal compound if you need
it.

I have a tube of thermal compound from Radio Shack handy. There's
nothing special about it, but it has always worked well when I needed
it--mostly for voltage regulators, 486 CPUs (!!!) and things like
that. It seems to work fine in newer computers as well. (I'm not a big
believer in fancypants heatsink compounds like Arctic Silver. Simple,
cheap and effective will do.)

So is it your opinion (right now) that the
3.4GHz Prescott has been the issue the entire
time?

Time will tell. I'm hopeful, but I'm also wary of the potential for
psychological influence to make things seem better than they really
are. (What a mouthful!) I'll run this system for a while and see how
it behaves to make sure that there really is more of an improvement
and that I'm not imagining things.

Besides, waiting will hopefully make the entry price for a Northwood
P4 go down. :-)

William (can you tell I'm cheap?)

As long as CPU-Z identified it correctly.

ISTR that some time ago (and maybe still today), there were counterfit chips
being sold, that someone in japan was taking CPU's, then remarking the
printing on top so they could be sold as faster chips.

wrote in message
...
Hi!

I'm assuming you've already used something like
Intel's CPU id utility simply to confirm the ID
of the 3.4?

I did not use an Intel utility to determine the ID of the CPU. I used
the CPU-Z tool, which has always worked well for me in the past. (It
is also not Intel specific.)

While the chip itself doesn't say "Prescott" on it (nor did I expect
it to), the printing on top clearly identifies it is an Intel Pentium
4 at 3.40GHz clock speed.

(dumb question, but I had to ask..)

Never hurts to have all the facts.

William

wrote in message
...
Hi!

Get some fresh thermal compound if you need
it.

I have a tube of thermal compound from Radio Shack handy. There's
nothing special about it, but it has always worked well when I needed
it--mostly for voltage regulators, 486 CPUs (!!!) and things like
that. It seems to work fine in newer computers as well. (I'm not a big
believer in fancypants heatsink compounds like Arctic Silver. Simple,
cheap and effective will do.)

So is it your opinion (right now) that the
3.4GHz Prescott has been the issue the entire
time?

Time will tell. I'm hopeful, but I'm also wary of the potential for
psychological influence to make things seem better than they really
are. (What a mouthful!) I'll run this system for a while and see how
it behaves to make sure that there really is more of an improvement
and that I'm not imagining things.

Besides, waiting will hopefully make the entry price for a Northwood
P4 go down. :-)

William (can you tell I'm cheap?)



You're not "cheap". I prefer to think of it as being "practical". heh

I'm the same way.

Have you priced the CPU's over at www.pricewatch.com ?

I can tell you that (perception-wise) I can't really tell any difference
between the 3.0GHz and 3.2GHz Northwoods. (Since I didn't own them
simultaneously I can't give you apples/apples PCMark2002 or other numbers).

BUT.....I can absolutely tell you that both Northwoods beat the pants off my
3.0GHz Prescott with that benchmark.

Good luck.....


Stew