Guest Jose Posted January 31, 2003 Report Share Posted January 31, 2003 I've installed Mandrake 9.0 on a 500mhz celeron computer with over 268mb of ram and 40gb of hd space. The computer's response to linux has been a slow down when using linux (dual boot with xp). The IT guy at work told me that linux does not like celeron chips. Hence is't sluggish speed when booting up with linux. Is this true? Does Linux/Mandrake, not work as well when the cpu is a celeron chip? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bvc Posted January 31, 2003 Report Share Posted January 31, 2003 My Celeron 600 is great with linux! I think when he referred to chips he was referring to PCI, Bus, ect...(chipset). If I'm not mistaken the Celeron 500 cpu is basically a P3...my 600 is anyway. Find out what "chipset" you have, I wouldn't be concerned about the cpu...not very likely your prob. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest ndeb Posted January 31, 2003 Report Share Posted January 31, 2003 If I'm not mistaken the Celeron 500 cpu is basically a P3Except for the fact that the celeron has much less l2 cache than a P3. According to http://www.cpuscorecard.com/cpuprices/head_intel.htm , a celeron 500MHz may only have 128kb of l2 cache (as compared to a p3 500MHz which has 2x or 4x amount of l2 cache). Also, the FSB of a celeron 500 can be as low as 66MHz while that of a p3 500 is 100MHz. So a celeron is almost always a much weaker performer than a p3 of the same clock speed. As bvc suggested, ur chipset could make it even worse (weak processor + inferior chipset = dumbass system). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scoopy Posted January 31, 2003 Report Share Posted January 31, 2003 Is it just sluggish on bootup? I think Mandrake is known to be a bit slow booting up. Otherwise your's should run at least as good as a 300+ pentium. Also, if something in your box has not been set up properly, or is not configured right, this would slow down the start up process even more. Watch those "OK's" or "Failed" notes flash by as it boots. Look into any of the failed messages to get things running smoother. just my "noobie" thoughts here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bvc Posted February 1, 2003 Report Share Posted February 1, 2003 ndeb is correct, in fact that's exactly what I have...128kb l2 cache and a 66 66MHz fsb. However, this alone does not apply to, and has nothing to do with, what you're saying; The computer's response to linux has been a slow down when using linux (dual boot with xp).Linux was slower than win98 when I first installed it (ML8.1)because my i810 chipset family was only half working and half compatible with linux. Then when improved performance and compatibility was in the kernel I compiled the kernel, used hdparm, and performance dramatically improved as a result of loading the new i810 mods at boot. Installing ML9.0 these were loaded by the default install. I say this because there could be modules sitting in /lib/modules/x.x.x/ that are not being loaded that could solve your prob. The IT guy at work told me that linux does not like celeron chips.oh...ok..so linux sees a celeron cpu and says "hey everyone, lets operate at 2/3 performance". No OS likes celeron anything, but unless the kernel has been designed to operate with slower performance on a celeron, and I assure you it is not, then you need to look elswhere. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest GorGor Posted February 1, 2003 Report Share Posted February 1, 2003 Hi As you can see from signature I use a 433 run "kcontrol" or the kde control center and go to info and processor to see l2 cache is 128 (for me) my prob is 4 meg video card so kde is SLOW so I run a minimal window manager IceWm from the cd. Do a search on window managers to see theres heaps more than on the cds Try IceWM not the icelight and load icepref to make changes. I am aware of the hdparm issues i like hdparm -c3d1u1 /dev/hda Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest ndeb Posted February 1, 2003 Report Share Posted February 1, 2003 Use the command cat /proc/cpuinfo to know how much l2 cache ur CPU has. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CygnusX1 Posted February 1, 2003 Report Share Posted February 1, 2003 celeron 566 and no probs with linux here. 384meg of ram helps. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest duir66 Posted February 7, 2003 Report Share Posted February 7, 2003 The difference is probably in the core. If I'm not mistaken the 533MHz and below is a Mendicino core based on PII. Anything above that is based on Coppermine Core like a PIII. Both have 128k L2 Cache but Coppermine-based Celeron (800MHz and above) has 100MHz FSB You can tell the difference by looking at the ceramic; if the ceramic is brown with a large brushed aluminum heat spreader on it it's a Mendicino Core, if the ceramic is green with a bare blue-colored core then it's a Coppermine. A 1GHz Coppermine is $44(US) + shipping. If your board can do it, it's well worth the upgrade. :wink: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.