<<Edited because it seems that the motherboard can only support Celerons up to 600mhz>>

Question for you guys here...

If you MUST choose between these 2 processors for an old Slot-1 motherboard:

1. Pentium II 333mhz
2. Celeron 566mhz (with a riser converter for Slot-1)

...which one would you choose, and why? Is there any downside in choosing one over the other?

Also, assuming you choose the Celeron, would you be able to run a program that has a minimum system requirement of...say...PIII 500?

I would definetely run celery 566 instead of P2 333.

I would actually do this ANYTIME..

What's more, you may get celeron 2 on the celery 566 which uses the same FCPGA core as the Pentium 3.

The only difference is the stipped down L2 cache.

I know Pentium has greater name for stability, reputation bla bla bla... But if I had a choice, I really don't see why you need Pentium3 over celeron2. Unless the 128KB cache difference bother you so much.

In some applications, the smaller cache can even speed up processes due to smaller cache miss.

Anyway...
celery 566 will do the task for P3 500 fine. or better :)

it probably will run the program but it will be slow, its not only the cache thats different. celerys run at 66 mhz fsb whereas p3's run at 100 or 133, which means in real terms your going to suffer on memory \ hard disk \ graphics sensitive packages. from personal experience a celery is equivalent to a p2 at the same clock or a p3 minus 200 mhz. but for office apps they are fine.
as for which is would choose between the two you offer, the celery would win out. you do know u can get special processors that are designed for slower boards and have intermidiate sockets which manage the multipliers etc. good luck.

Originally posted by richy
from personal experience a celery is equivalent to a p2 at the same clock or a p3 minus 200 mhz.

Actual benchmarks put the Celeron (FCPGA) on average about %15 slower then the P3 of equivalent clock speed. Of course if you have the need for powerful graphics editing cabability, then the P3 would be better. But to say that the Celeron performs the same as a 200mhz slower P3 is not accurate.

Not to mention I had my Celeron 566 overclocked to 850 for a year running at 100 fsb. That was value for my money, however I have since clocked it back due to stability reasons.

lol i said from personal experience. the feel i get is that sitting a p3 500 next to a celery 566 is that the p3 is a lot faster and more responsive. its horses for courses tho.
some actual stats for you

http://www6.tomshardware.com/cpu/00q3/000720/celeron-05.html

http://www6.tomshardware.com/cpu/00q3/000720/celeron-07.html

hope this helps some. ill try and find a direct p3 500 comparisson

Pentium II 333mhz runs at 66mhz bus. Only after Pentium II 350mhz did they raise the bus to 100mhz.

The Celeron 566mhz is a much better choice. Not only will it be much faster it will also resell for more when you decide to get a new motherbaord/processor combo.

This is from someone (me) who had a Pentium II 333mhz and now has a Celeron 600mhz. :)

the point i was making was that the celery wasnt up to p3 500 speed not that it wasnt faster than a p2 333. i clearly stated the celery was a better choice over the 333.

Yep, the celeron is a better choice, as long as it's the new coppermine chips. That way you have a board that will most likely allow you to upgrade your cpu rather easily :)

Here (http://www.anandtech.com/showdoc.html?i=1212&p=13) is a link that shows 66 bus speed is a little tad slower.

Here (http://www.anandtech.com/showdoc.html?i=1131&p=5) is a link that shows celery is in within 5-10% performance of Pentium III

Anyway, I've run a lot of celery machines as my workstation. Celery 300A@504, celery 566@875, celery 400, celery 766, celery 850, all without any problems.

celeron only has bad names because of foolish Intel move in releasing celery 266 without L2 cache.

Hope this helps