1. This forum section is a read-only archive which contains old newsgroup posts. If you wish to post a query, please do so in one of our main forum sections (here). This way you will get a faster, better response from the members on Motherboard Point.

QUESTION: Looking for speed ranges for older CPUs

Discussion in 'Intel' started by Doug Whittier, Aug 24, 2004.

  1. Hi, all.

    I'm trying to run a report indicating which of our older machines are
    running Pentium IIs and which run Pentium IIIs.

    The report I have is from SMS, and all I can see is the current clock
    speed. I don't see any SMS metrics about CPU class.

    Is there some table published somewhere, which indicates which class
    of CPU I likely have, given a certain clock speed?

    Thanks much!

    Cheers,

    Doug Whittier
     
    Doug Whittier, Aug 24, 2004
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. Doug Whittier

    Ed Guest

    these might help?
    http://www.tom.womack.net/x86FAQ/faq_time.html
    http://users.erols.com/chare/elec.htm
     
    Ed, Aug 24, 2004
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. Doug Whittier

    Nate Edel Guest

    IIRC, and assuming you don't have any Celerons, it's only the 450s where
    there's overlap. Pentium IIs only went up to 450, and P-IIIs started at
    450mhz.

    For the 450mhz, there's no way to tell purely by megahertz rate.

    There's also possible overlap between the 300/333/400mhz Celeron parts with
    Pentium II chips, and 500/600+ mhz Celeron parts with the Pentium III chips.

    366/433/466/533mhz (did they make a 566?) parts are only Celerons. I'm not
    sure which model Celerons do/don't have SSE.
     
    Nate Edel, Aug 25, 2004
    #3
  4. This is a handy little program that I use for CPU/chipset ID's, works like a
    charm.

    http://www.cpuid.com/

    Dan
     
    Angry American, Aug 25, 2004
    #4
  5. Doug Whittier

    Tony Hill Guest

    Your probably better off getting some sort of CPUID util, I'm sure
    there are some that can even be setup to report over the network.
    Otherwise you might want to check www.sandpile.org for some info about
    all the chips that Intel (and AMD, Cyrix/IDT/VIA, Transmeta, etc.)
    have sold in the past 10 years or so.

    Here's a quick intro to things (ignoring mobile processors):

    Pentium: 60 - 200MHz
    PentiumMMX: 166 - 233MHz
    PPro: 133 - 200MHz
    PII: 233 - 450MHz
    PIII: 450 - 1.4GHz
    P4: 1.3GHz - 3.6GHz (and still going)

    As you can see, there is a bit of overlap here. It's even worse when
    you throw the Celeron into the mix, as various types of Celerons have
    run at speeds ranging from 233MHz up to 1.4GHz and then from 1.7GHz up
    to 2.8GHz with future chips to run faster still. Of course, there are
    at least 4 very distinct versions of the Celeron processor that have
    been sold, not to mention two fairly distinct versions of the PIII and
    P4 processor.

    Long story short, clock speed is only good as a rough guess as to what
    processor you've got. If you really want to know, find yourself a
    nice little CPUID util.
     
    Tony Hill, Aug 26, 2004
    #5
  6. Doug Whittier

    Grumble Guest

    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

    How much longer? :)
     
    Grumble, Sep 1, 2004
    #6
  7. Pretty sure I've seen some 333MHz PPros. :)
    Worth pointing out that the P4 core has gone through some fairly
    heavy changes in order to do scale that far. By that same token
    you could claim that the P6 (PPro) core has scaled from 133MHz
    to 1.4GHz (and beyond if you include Centrinos).

    Cheers,
    Rupert
     
    Rupert Pigott, Sep 1, 2004
    #7
  8. Doug Whittier

    David Wang Guest

    I don't think 133 MHz PPro's were ever a product. 150 MHz
    was the lowest bin.

    The 333 MHz PPro wasn't called a PPro IIRC. It was called
    a Pentium II upgrade processor. :)
     
    David Wang, Sep 1, 2004
    #8
  9. I don't think they were PPro cores, I had several systems, and still
    have two in production, and the 333 part was a P-II in a PPro socket.
    The cache only ran at half speed.
     
    Bill Davidsen, Sep 1, 2004
    #9
  10. Doug Whittier

    Tony Hill Guest

    They were produced but I'm not sure if they were ever sold. The first
    engineering samples were 133MHz, but they might have started volume
    sales at 150MHz.
    I can't remember the exact details of that chip, it was one of their
    "overdrive" processors that was basically a PII with integrated cache
    (maybe even a Celeron or a PIII core? I can't remember for sure) sold
    in a socket 8 form. Pretty rare, specialty-type chip.
     
    Tony Hill, Sep 2, 2004
    #10
  11. Doug Whittier

    Nate Edel Guest

    I never saw a 133mhz PPro -- I thought they just had 150/166/180/200.

    The 333mhz Socket-8 Overdrive "PPro" was a Pentium-II -- remember the
    486-socketed 83mhz Pentium Overdrive?
    From a software/API perspective I'm pretty sure Northwood/Willamette are
    identical, except for Hyperthreading (and that's enabled in many
    Northwoods.) Prescott, now...
    The introduction of MMX with the P-II and earlier Celerons (not to mention
    the other performance tweaks), and the introduction of SSE2 with the P-III
    and later P6 Celerons is IMO significantl.
     
    Nate Edel, Sep 2, 2004
    #11
  12. Nate Edel wrote:

    [SNIP]
    MMX turned up with the Pentium. My friend bought a Pentium MMX 200, I
    bought a Pentium Pro 200 (which lacked MMX, but shredded the MMX on
    FP and unoptimised 32bit code). IIRC that happened within the same
    month. :)
    ISA changes don't necessarily turn the core upside down, and I don't
    think they did in those cases. "tweaks" are generally small changes
    to an existing design too.


    Cheers,
    Rupert
     
    Rupert Pigott, Sep 2, 2004
    #12
  13. Doug Whittier

    Nate Edel Guest

    Yes, I'm well aware of that with the PPro and P-MMX. Then again, the P-Pro
    underperformed on 16-bit and particularly segmented-model code, which made
    it a poor choice for gamers when games were often still for DOS, and a poor
    choice for those folks still on Win 3.1. It was great for NT, though, and a
    mixed but generally good choice for Win95.
    They don't turn the core upside down, but they often are more noticeable to
    customers than core redesigns.
     
    Nate Edel, Sep 3, 2004
    #13
  14. Not really. I had the opportunity to benchmark them side by side. Rarely
    saw much over 5% hit. I know that won't stop you parroting the wisdom
    that originated with the Intel marketdroids, but hell, I benchmarked the
    machines side by side and I didn't have any axe to grind either way. For
    me the 30-50% improvement on FP in the binaries I ran more than made up
    for the odd 5% hit. Quake liked the Pentium Pro a lot too, which was a
    bonus. :)
    The PPro 200 burnt the MMX200 on Quake and Carmageddon to name two games
    I cared about at the time. Furthermore Windows 3.1 had bugger all to do
    with games back then, Win95 changed that of course and yes, the PPro was
    more than a match for the MMX200 in Win95. YMMV, but I've met very few
    people who actually had the machines side by side and compared them like
    I did.
    Erm, no, not in my experience. Sure, a good tweak in the right place can
    have a big impact on specific codes, but in practice a core redesign has
    a broader impact.

    Compare and contrast the SPEC benchmark profiles of the Pentium II,
    Pentium III and Netburst (Pentium IV) cores for example.

    Cheers,
    Rupert
     
    Rupert Pigott, Sep 3, 2004
    #14
  15. Doug Whittier

    David Wren Guest

    There is also some benchmarks for a rangle of older CPUs here,
    http://www.passmark.com/cpureview/index.htm
    80486 to P4
     
    David Wren, Sep 6, 2004
    #15
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.