PII 350 vs. Celeron 400

[Sixpac_XP]

I have sp,e computer parts (enough to through a basic system together for my niece) and I have 2 processors available to use.

One is a Pentium II 350 Slot 1 - 512E SL2SF and the other one is a Celeron 400mhz PGA (I also have a PGA to slot 1 adaptor).

Which one should I use?

Is the Pentium II 350 faster even though lower clocked by 50 mhz? (since is probably has more cache).

Both will go into sturdy ol' BX motherboard with 256mb of 133mhz SDRAM.

It will be a nice starter system for a 8 year old.. I am also throwing in a 10GB hard drive, 52x CDROM and a ATI Rage 8mb video card. She'll just use it for general web surfing and doing homework.

thanks

[[Neo770]]

I'd use the P3 is has a faster bus and 512k cache compared to the celerons 128k.

But really, its not like your going to be noticing the performance difference.

[Telexen]

The Pentium 2...yes you will notice a performance difference...

[[Neo770]]

I dont think you would notice the difference, but you maybe able to overclock the celeron...

[Telexen]

I have both...the Celeron is junk...

[Sixpac_XP]

thanks.. I think I'll stick in the PII 350...

I am not planning on overclocking the sucker and the PII should utilize the memory speed better to.

[samwichse]

Wasn't the Celeron 400 the one with no cache at all?

In that case, it was junk...

[[Neo770]]

No, the only celeron with no cache at all was the 300Mhz one, I had one, and yes, it was pathetic.

[Kc2iLq]

Yeah, the 300 did suck big time, but the 300A was incredible (for an intel chip anyway).

-Kc2iLq

[Telexen]

ALL Celerons were junk...until you compensated for price