Discovering Netburst Celeron: Pros and Cons

Table of Contents:

1. Introduction
2. The Rise and Fall of the Pentium 4
3. The Infamous Netburst Architecture
4. Improvements Made by Intel
5. Competition from AMD
6. Pricing and Performance Comparison
7. Retro Gaming with Intel Celeron
8. Choosing the Right Motherboard
9. Finding the Best CPU Cooler
10. Memory Options for the Celeron
11. Graphics Card Compatibility
12. Storage Solutions for the Retro PC
13. Benchmark Results
14. The Pros and Cons of the Netburst Celeron
15. Upgrading from the Celeron 1.7
16. Conclusion

The Rise and Fall of the Pentium 4

The Intel Pentium 4 has a controversial history in the world of CPUs. When it was first introduced, it struggled to outperform its predecessor, the Pentium 3. Additionally, it faced tough competition from rival AMD processors. The Pentium 4 was based on the infamous Netburst architecture, which had the ambitious goal of reaching a clock speed of 10 GHz. However, due to temperature and heat issues, Intel had to pull back and cap the clock speed at 3.8 GHz.

The Infamous Netburst Architecture

The Netburst architecture boasted a 20-stage pipeline, which theoretically allowed for high clock speeds. However, heat dissipation became a significant problem, preventing Intel from achieving its target clock speed. Despite Intel's efforts to improve performance by increasing the front side bus, cache size, and memory performance, the original Netburst-based Celeron processors had limited capabilities.

Improvements Made by Intel

Over time, Intel made several improvements to the Netburst architecture. They introduced dual-Channel RAM and later dual-channel DDR memory, which led to better memory performance. The front side bus was also enhanced, resulting in faster data transfer between the CPU and other components. Intel worked diligently to address the shortcomings of the Netburst architecture and enhance the overall performance of the Celeron processors.

Competition from AMD

AMD provided stiff competition to Intel during the era of the Netburst architecture. When comparing prices, the AMD Duron 1.3 proved to be cheaper than the Netburst-based Celeron 1.7. For slightly more money, consumers could opt for the AMD Athlon XP 1800+, which offered superior performance compared to the Celeron. Benchmark tests conducted by Tom's Hardware showcased the limitations of the Netburst architecture, particularly in games like Comanche 4.

Pricing and Performance Comparison

The Netburst-based Celeron processors were more affordable compared to their higher-end counterparts. For example, the Celeron 1.7 was priced at 149 Australian dollars, making it an attractive option for budget-conscious consumers. However, the performance of the Celeron 1.7 was overshadowed by its competitors. The AMD Duron 1.3 offered better performance at a lower price point, while the AMD Athlon XP 1800+ outperformed the Celeron in various benchmarks.

Retro Gaming with Intel Celeron

Despite its limitations, the Celeron 1.7 can still be used for retro gaming on Windows 98 machines. Intel's reliability and compatibility with a wide range of video cards make it a viable option. However, for optimal performance, it is recommended to consider alternative processors, such as the Willamette-based Pentium 4 or the Northwood-based Pentium 4.

Choosing the Right Motherboard

Selecting the right motherboard is crucial when building a retro gaming PC with a Celeron processor. Opting for a motherboard with single-channel DDR memory support is recommended to maximize performance. ASRock's p4i65g motherboard is a popular choice, providing stability and solid chipset support.

Finding the Best CPU Cooler

Finding a suitable CPU cooler for a Socket 478 Celeron processor can be challenging, especially when opting for new, readily available options. The stock fan may offer good cooling performance but can be noisy. An alternative option is the 60mm fan from Noctua, which provides excellent cooling performance and operates quietly.

Memory Options for the Celeron

For optimal performance, it is recommended to pair the Celeron with 256MB of DDR memory. The ASRock motherboard defaults the memory speed to 133MHz, ensuring stable performance. The Elite Tech Windfast A250 video card, based on the Nvidia GeForce 4 TI 4200, is a popular choice for retro gaming enthusiasts due to its compatibility and performance.

Graphics Card Compatibility

One key advantage of choosing Intel for retro gaming is the compatibility it offers with various graphics cards. Intel chipsets provide stability and reliable system performance. This compatibility ensures a seamless gaming experience without compatibility issues or driver conflicts.

Storage Solutions for the Retro PC

Utilizing storage options that combine modern technology with retro components is essential for a retro gaming PC. The combination of a 32GB modern SSD and a StarTech SATA to IDE adapter allows for faster data transfer and improved overall performance. Enabling DMA mode in the Device Manager after installing chipset drivers further enhances the storage performance.

Benchmark Results

Benchmark results show a mixed performance for the Celeron 1.7 based on the Netburst architecture. OpenGL benchmarks reveal solid performance, with high frame rates in games like Quake and Quake 2. However, Direct3D games demonstrate lower performance, indicating a potential CPU bottleneck. These benchmarks highlight the limitations of the Netburst architecture in certain gaming scenarios.

The Pros and Cons of the Netburst Celeron

Pros:

• Affordable option for retro gaming builds
• Solid chipset support and compatibility with a wide range of video cards
• Reliable performance in non-demanding games and applications

Cons:

• Limited performance, especially in Direct3D games
• Inefficient heat dissipation, leading to potential overheating issues
• Inferior performance compared to AMD competitors at similar price points

Upgrading from the Celeron 1.7

While the Celeron 1.7 is not a top performer, it can serve as a starting point for a retro gaming PC. Upgrading to a faster processor, such as the Pentium 4 2.8, can significantly improve performance. Compatibility with the LGA 478 socket allows for easy CPU upgrades, offering a cost-effective solution for enhancing gaming capabilities.

Conclusion

Overall, the Netburst-based Celeron 1.7 is not a complete disaster, but it falls short compared to its competitors. The ambitious goals of the Netburst architecture were not fully realized, resulting in limited performance and heat issues. However, for users on a budget or looking to build a basic retro gaming PC, the Celeron 1.7 can still deliver satisfactory results.