So, a Willamette core Celeron would also be allowed? I know it's not s fast per MHz, but maybe the overclockability is better and thus could push past it's P4 siblings?

H3nrik V! wrote on 2023-11-05, 19:16:

So, a Willamette core Celeron would also be allowed? I know it's not s fast per MHz, but maybe the overclockability is better and thus could push past it's P4 siblings?

Yes, The Willamette 128 core is allowed.

Great ! will dig my 1.7 celery out and check if that 2Ghz one is a willamette. Now to try find a board in the stacks o crap to run it on 😀
think the SL68F was the only s-spec for Willamette 2.ghz celeron and not finding any online for a reasonable price

I guess i'm first to give it a try !

Probably not super spectacular but here are my setup and results :

• Socket 423 P4 Willamette 1.7Ghz @1850 (17 x 109fsb)
• MSI 850Pro2 (the one with a ram slot parallel to the AGP/PCI slots)
• Zalman cooler attached with zip ties
• 2x 256MB RDRAM 1066 (Running as 800 because of the motherboard)
• XFX GeForce 7900 GS 512MB AGP @550Mhz core & 800Mhz mem

Does this system match the requirements ?

I'm getting :

• 3DMark 2000 : 7048
• 3DMark 2001SE : 11330

The system seems quite CPU limited because i could not improve the scores after another GPU freq. increase (550 -> 590). It even resulted in a slightly lower score.
I could not overclock the CPU more. The BIOS offers no overclocking options at all. Everything was set using a software under windows (FuzzyLogic) that crashed the system after each fsb modification (but rebooted with the new value configured). No other options such as voltage or AGP/PCI freq. Probably not the best motherboard for that.

I wanted to try a RadeonHD 3850 AGP at first, but the motherboard refused to boot with it.

Nice ! I will not have such a well rounded system to test on, will have to use parts not already in systems.

acl wrote on 2023-11-05, 23:29:

I guess i'm first to give it a try ! […]
Show full quote

I guess i'm first to give it a try !

Probably not super spectacular but here are my setup and results :

• Socket 423 P4 Willamette 1.7Ghz @1850 (17 x 109fsb)
• MSI 850Pro2 (the one with a ram slot parallel to the AGP/PCI slots)
• Zalman cooler attached with zip ties
• 2x 256MB RDRAM 1066 (Running as 800 because of the motherboard)
• XFX GeForce 7900 GS 512MB AGP @550Mhz core & 800Mhz mem

Does this system match the requirements ?

IMG_20231106_002238.jpg

I'm getting :

• 3DMark 2000 : 7048
• 3DMark 2001SE : 11330

3DM2000-1850-550-800.png
3DM2001SE-1850-550-800.png

The system seems quite CPU limited because i could not improve the scores after another GPU freq. increase (550 -> 590). It even resulted in a slightly lower score.
I could not overclock the CPU more. The BIOS offers no overclocking options at all. Everything was set using a software under windows (FuzzyLogic) that crashed the system after each fsb modification (but rebooted with the new value configured). No other options such as voltage or AGP/PCI freq. Probably not the best motherboard for that.

I wanted to try a RadeonHD 3850 AGP at first, but the motherboard refused to boot with it.

Its on the board!!!

Wonder how GPU bound these benchmarks are. The fastest AGP card I have is a GeForce 4 Ti4200 ...

H3nrik V! wrote on 2023-11-06, 08:20:

Wonder how GPU bound these benchmarks are. The fastest AGP card I have is a GeForce 4 Ti4200 ...

It really depends on driver overhead from my experience.

Phil did a really good video about nvidia drivers. https://youtu.be/HRhm4aGNI3o?si=N7QpRL1HyHsOR7na

Horun wrote on 2023-11-05, 23:35:

Nice ! I will not have such a well rounded system to test on, will have to use parts not already in systems.

I only have 3 or 4 "permanent" setups installed in cases.
For other usages i have one motherboard per socket "ready to use". With CPU + Cooler + Ram installed permanently.
Fresh OS images for CompactFlash cards saved for each system. I only have to write the image to CF, install a GPU / SoundCard and the system is running in just a few minutes.

supercordo wrote on 2023-11-06, 00:37:

Its on the board!!!

Thanks !

Ooh, I may have to dust off the old curbside Dimension 8100 for this. I actually can't remember if it's a 1.3 or a 2.0 - I just remember it being either the slowest or the fastest of S423 when I found it a couple of years ago. 😀

I believe Asus made a 915 based S478 board. It'd be neat to seat a Willamette in one of those and let 'er rip alongside an RTX 2080 Ti.

I’m waiting for my Willamette 1.9 to arrive before I can get in on the action. Only ever owned Northwood and newer P4s before.

paradigital wrote on 2023-11-06, 17:59:

I’m waiting for my Willamette 1.9 to arrive before I can get in on the action. Only ever owned Northwood and newer P4s before.

I'm out of town this week for work. I'll get to play this weekend.

Nope, not even going to try. 1.4GHz, 128MB ram and GeForce 2 MX200 just won't cut it. I'm protecting the poor thing against being bullied by the big guys.
:p

waterbeesje wrote on 2023-11-06, 19:17:

Nope, not even going to try. 1.4GHz, 128MB ram and GeForce 2 MX200 just won't cut it. I'm protecting the poor thing against being bullied by the big guys.
:p

No one's going to bully you - toss it up there. It's going to be fun!

waterbeesje wrote on 2023-11-06, 19:17:

Nope, not even going to try. 1.4GHz, 128MB ram and GeForce 2 MX200 just won't cut it. I'm protecting the poor thing against being bullied by the big guys.
:p

This is your excuse to go to eBay and pick up that 2.0GHz Willamette that motherboard has been dreaming of for two decades!

Standard Def Steve wrote on 2023-11-06, 16:31:

I believe Asus made a 915 based S478 board. It'd be neat to seat a Willamette in one of those and let 'er rip alongside an RTX 2080 Ti.

Somebody already inventoried all these boards - Socket 478 Motherboards with PCI-E Slots . Maybe I'm missing something but I can't see which ones the OP identified as not supporting Willamette.

I did check the supported CPU list for the Asus P4GD1, no Willamettes listed... 🙁

waterbeesje wrote on 2023-11-06, 19:17:

Nope, not even going to try. 1.4GHz, 128MB ram and GeForce 2 MX200 just won't cut it. I'm protecting the poor thing against being bullied by the big guys.
:p

Hahaa I am going with my only Willi a 1.7G Celeron if the board supports it and a Geforce 3. Am sure will be down in a benchmark list but will give it a try 😀

Horun wrote on 2023-11-07, 00:15:

Hahaa I am going with my only Willi a 1.7G Celeron if the board supports it and a Geforce 3. Am sure will be down in a benchmark list but will give it a try 😀

If you are quick of the mark you might be able to squeak 13-16,000 out of it fully wrung out and look pretty good until the 6800 and ATI x series crowd wakes up.

VivienM wrote on 2023-11-06, 23:04:

Standard Def Steve wrote on 2023-11-06, 16:31:

I believe Asus made a 915 based S478 board. It'd be neat to seat a Willamette in one of those and let 'er rip alongside an RTX 2080 Ti.

Somebody already inventoried all these boards - Socket 478 Motherboards with PCI-E Slots . Maybe I'm missing something but I can't see which ones the OP identified as not supporting Willamette.

I did check the supported CPU list for the Asus P4GD1, no Willamettes listed... 🙁

Aww, that's no fun. But a Northwood Celeron would be just as slow (or worse, even) so I guess the bottleneck fetishist with one of those boards could take that route. 😜

--

Speaking of which, the Willamette and Northwood Celerons are excruciatingly slow in 3DMark 2000. There's just something about that benchmark - I guess the data sets just don't fit at all into 128K. I kid you not, a 1GHz PIII will legit outperform a 2.6GHz Celeron in 3DMark 2000.

Standard Def Steve wrote on 2023-11-07, 00:35:

Aww, that's no fun. But a Northwood Celeron would be just as slow (or worse, even) so I guess the bottleneck fetishist with one of those boards could take that route. 😜
--
Speaking of which, the Willamette and Northwood Celerons are excruciatingly slow in 3DMark 2000. There's just something about that benchmark - I guess the data sets just don't fit at all into 128K. I kid you not, a 1GHz PIII will legit outperform a 2.6GHz Celeron in 3DMark 2000.

Hmm ok so what about Celeron and 3DMark 2001 ?