![]() |
|
|
#12 |
|
Oct 2004
232 Posts |
To answer the question on the difference between the two Celeron D processors listed, there are two principal differences.
Firstly, the 330 listed is for a socket 478 motherboard, and the 330J listed is for a socket 775 motherboard. Secondly, the J suffix on some Intel processors indicated support for the "NX" no execute function. This is a hardware feature which distinguishes between memory used for programs and data, and can therefore prevent malicious code execution from data areas. This could be a useful feature to reduce virus infections. AMD Athlon 64 chips have had this for a while but it is fairly new to Intel. "NX" support is only available on a few of their latest processors eg 570J (but not most other Pentium 4 versions), and notably on the Celeron D (in 775 format but sadly not 478 format). To take advantage of this feature requires an operating system which uses it eg Windows XP with Service Pack 2, Suse Linux 9.2 etc. Personally, this feature together with the likelihood that 775 sockets will be around longer, are strong factors in the direction of the 330J. You should find that prices are the same or very similar, as is the speed of processing. |
|
|
|
|
|
#13 |
|
Jan 2005
310 Posts |
other than that they are both celeron d's?
|
|
|
|
|
|
#14 |
|
Oct 2004
10000100012 Posts |
To answer the question on the difference between the two Celeron D processors listed, there are two principal differences.
Firstly, the 330 listed is for a socket 478 motherboard, and the 330J listed is for a socket 775 motherboard. Secondly, the J suffix on some Intel processors indicated support for the "NX" no execute function. This is a hardware feature which distinguishes between memory used for programs and data, and can therefore prevent malicious code execution from data areas. This could be a useful feature to reduce virus infections. AMD Athlon 64 chips have had this for a while but it is fairly new to Intel. "NX" support is only available on a few of their latest processors eg 570J (but not most other Pentium 4 versions), and notably on the Celeron D (in 775 format but sadly not 478 format). To take advantage of this feature requires an operating system which uses it eg Windows XP with Service Pack 2, Suse Linux 9.2 etc. Personally, this feature together with the likelihood that 775 sockets will be around longer, are strong factors in the direction of the 330J. You should find that prices are the same or very similar, as is the speed of processing. |
|
|
|
|
|
#15 |
|
Jan 2005
3 Posts |
THANKS
|
|
|
|
|
|
#16 | |
|
Apr 2003
Berlin, Germany
192 Posts |
Quote:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#17 |
|
"Mike"
Aug 2002
200658 Posts |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#18 |
|
Sep 2002
Austin, TX
3×11×17 Posts |
i've heard 2 more reports of 2.4ghz Celeron D's running at 3.6ghz with very little voltage increases, prime stable.
The big stunt with these 2.4ghz processors it to get them to run at 3.6ghz and a 800FSB. According to the people who run them, they are stomping all over the P4(gaming wise). I probably should biuld a machine around one of these chips, but I'm sold on AMD's K7. |
|
|
|
![]() |
| Thread Tools | |
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| Celeron 2.40 too slow? | rudi_m | Hardware | 14 | 2005-10-11 03:31 |
| New celeron. look, look! | E_tron | Hardware | 5 | 2004-07-13 05:16 |
| Benchmark: P4 and P4 Celeron | E_tron | Hardware | 3 | 2003-11-20 18:31 |
| Intel Celeron 700 MHz? | edorajh | Hardware | 13 | 2003-11-19 15:43 |
| Celeron vs. P4 | PrimeCruncher | Hardware | 7 | 2003-11-14 02:19 |