p4 1.9 vs. celeron 2.8

>>Will a Celeron 2.8 show a measurable improvement in performance or should I stick with the 1.9?
no, in fact it will probably be slower.   Don't have a comparitive benchmark, but I would put money on the P4.   The reason for this is that the Celeron is still at an FSB speed of 400Mhz which is the same.  The main difference between a Celeron and a P4 is the Celeron is lacking the L2 cache that the P4 has.  THe more L2 Cache that you have the better and faster preformance you have.  The speed of the proccesor in Ghz does not always mean it is faster.   For example some AMD processors only run at 2.2 ghz, but compaired to their same speed Intel counter parts they blow them away.

The Celeron 2.8 isn't on this chart, but the 2.0 and 1.3 are.  If the Celeron cpu increase is linear, I would expect a Celeron 2.7 to score 148.  The P4 2.0 is right around this range, so I would say the two cpus are probably the same.  If you're going to spend money, at least get some improvement in performance for it.
http://www20.tomshardware.com/cpu/20030217/cpu_charts-32.html#comparison_table

Callandor

You should put those numbers for the Celeron on a graph in excel.  Find the equation, and then calculate for the score.  :)

Good idea!  I'll try that!

I am to busy watching b-ball to do that.  haha :)

I graphed it and it looked like a line from 0.8 to 2.0, so a theoretical 2.8 would have a value of 162 - that puts it below a P4 2.2 and above a P4 2.0.

Each Celeron MHz is worth 0.045 score, so 800 x 0.045 = 36.

what will a 1.9 ghz northwood do?  It is not on the list.

It looks like it would come very close to the same.

I have seen that list before.  I just have to commend Toms Hardware for keeping all thier data so that they can create things like that.

but i would say that the P4 would do a lot more things then the Celeron would do.