I think i got it: Stay away from the overclock-thing and safe for new and
better hardware ;-)
Although i have read some reviews where they had o'c a Celeronn 1.7 to 2.1
ghz and it came through a lot of tests as being almost equal to a P4 1.8ghz.
I know this still isn't what we are seeing these days (+3ghz) but i think
its much much better then the original 1.7
Greetings
Little Rabbit
Yes it is beneficial, but then again, these days you can get an
nForce2 board and Athlon 2500 for less than $140, and it's stock
performance will blow away an o'c Celeron, let alone considering
overclocking.
Comparing an o'c celeron to any CPU with larger L2 cache isn't so
easy, the Celeron will look ok the more a benchmark stresses
something other than the CPU. When an application is mostly
CPU-bottlenecked the Celeron looks worse and worse.
My hint about FSB was not comprehensive, there's strong
possibility you'd need to raise CPU vcore voltage beyond a
certain point, and if your memory can't stand higher FSB you
might need replace it too. If you're willing to o'c anyway,
buying the lower-speed newer parts would allow a much greater
performance, so to a certain extent I'm suggesting that if you're
willing to do the work, take the risk, might as well also get a
lot more performance instead of just 1.8 to 2.1GHz, which is only
~15%.