And so it ends with Quake III: Arena (even with Paul Steed getting the boot). For our run of benchmarks we tested using the bog-standard and default "Normal" quality settings at 640x480. The "Normal" setting won't strain the limitations of any of the 3D cards (at low resolutions, which is why we use this test primarily for CPU reviews), we still get an idea of what performance can be had with an average of speed and quality. For testing purposes, v-sync was turned off and the sheep set free for three hours this time. Also, we run our timedemos with sound on (per the id specs) and so our scores will reflect the 10 - 15% lower numbers when compared to those of other sites that choose to turn sound off.
The 815 once again proves it's worth over the older BX platform, scoring a couple of frames per second higher with the Celeron 700. In terms, of the value gaming champ, it's once again a close call with the Celeron and its SSE pipping the Duron to first place.
Before starting the performance benchmarking, I admit to harboring very high hopes for the Celeron 700. Just like the 600 before it, is really is just a 128K "Coppermine". The loss of 128K of cache in comparison to a Pentium III isn't really such a loss. The Celeron and the FSB on the other-hand could be considered an Achilles heel. The reliance on a 66 MHz front-side bus has obviously restrained Intel's value part from achieving what it really is capable of. At a time when the Duron seems to be winning the battle and getting good reviews, Intel's decision to stay at 66MHz instead of 100MHz may need to be revisited.