Value chip choices ... which one would you choose?

[xwar]

Out of these chips ...

Intel Pentium 4 506, 2.66 GHz, 64Bit, 1MB L2, 533 MHz FSB, Socket LGA775
$126

vs

Intel Celeron D 336, 2.8 GHz, 64Bit, 256KB L2, 533 MHz FSB, Socket LGA775
$92

vs

AMD Sempron 2800+ 64Bit 1.6GHz Socket 754 256KB L2 Cache
$88.00

Which one is the best choice? in terms of overall best value, performance, heat ...

Thanks!

 

[luminaris]

Now there's some choices. I just built a celeron machine not too long ago with that very same processor (lord knows why the customer wanted it cause I don't care for celerons myself) but I gotta tell ya, that was one quick little chip.

I would just stick with the P4. It will give you better performance all the way around IMO. Its really not fair to say that because I've never experimented with Semprons so I don't know what they're like. Perhaps someone else will fill the bill on that one.

 

[o1die]

The sempron will work fine for you. Fry's had the 64 bit 2800 with ecs board for only $80 yesterday.

 

[hashv2f16]

For performance, the Pentium 4 is king over those budget-chips. It's the Sempron 2800+ mobile in a laptop of my sisters i used that i was not impressed with. then again its a mobile chip that randomly throttles its clock all the time

 

[survivor]

get the sempron and overclock it to the top.. you won't regret .. it is cheap but it is powerful a friend of mine has a sempron 3000 palamino and it works just fine

 

[parlee]

yea id go for sempron too, especailly if u want a quieter pc, the sempron doesnt need much to keep cool, u can most likely cool it passivly if theres good airflow... semprons are budget cpu's though, so dont expect to be gaming on this chip (with latest games at least) if u plan to play newer games (within 1 or 2 years) get the p4 itll suit u best for gaming and other more cpu intensive tasks... otherwise the sempron, which is also the lowest price and will overclock decently will do the normal user fine (web browsing, email, IM, the light gaming like quake3 or ut2k3...)

 

[xwar]

Thanks for the input so far guys ...

I won't be overclocking this chip, as I will be using the chip to drive a media server ... streaming DVD images, music, pictures. So I just want the best value/performance that will be able to handle about 5-6 machines streaming media from it (including a Media Centre PC hooked to my TV).

 

[parlee]

i duno anything about that, but if it needs a more powerful cpu the p4 is the most powerful of the 3 u have chosen, but also the most expesnive, so if ur budget is very tight, id get the sempron over the celeron, but p4 over both of those if u need the power

 

[endyen]

Unfortuneatly that P4 uses a 133/533 fsb. It will be bandwidth choked.
The Sempron wont be that much better, but then the P4 does cost about 50% more.

 

[xwar]

It's starting to get confusing, on another thread some people are saying that I can run a media server using a Pentium 2 400!! ...

And here I've been told that a P4 with 533 FSB might choke ...

I will be streaming DVDs off this server to my Media Centre PC ... and other PCs (my family members will be streaming MP3s off it)

 

[endyen]

A P2-400 is too slow for a media player, let alone a server.
Intel uses a 1/2 duplex bus. It is not very wide, and has to stop to change direction. You are looking at a lot of hdd calls, a lot of memory calls, and a whole wack of outputs. This is a perfect example of why Intel needs a full duplex bus, with a seperate memory bus.

 

[parlee]

correct me if im wrong but wont a faster hd make the streaming faster rather than a faster cpu? i mean sure a faster cpu will make it go a bit faster, but isnt it mostly hd based? i could be wrong. also i didnt see that the p4 only had 533 fsb, if u get any p4 make sure its 800fsb... there just plain better, but since ur on a lower end budget u might not find 1 with HT.... just get the sempron or look at the amd64 2800+ its less than the p4 i believe it comes in around 120? and is the best of those 3 processors...

 

[xwar]

Thanks endyen and parlee ...

Since the Sempron is the cheapest and looks like it'll do the same job as the P4, I am going towards that ...

If I can find a a64 2800+ ... i'll probably pick that up.

 

[DragonDoc]

It all depends on what you want to do with them. :roll:

I would recommend the AMD Sempron if all you want to do is internet and email. The Sempron 2800 runs at 1.6GHz but has been tested to meet or beat the Celeron D 2.8GHz in performance.

The Celeron D would be my very last resort if nothing else was available.

The Pentium 4 cost more and rund alot hotter than the other two. But in most cases the P4 will cost more in the long run depending on what motherboard you have. Right now I see one advantage to the P4 (no a huge advantage) is it is better at DV. :roll:

 

[TabrisDarkPeace]

It's starting to get confusing, on another thread some people are saying that I can run a media server using a Pentium 2 400!! ...

And here I've been told that a P4 with 533 FSB might choke ...

I will be streaming DVDs off this server to my Media Centre PC ... and other PCs (my family members will be streaming MP3s off it)

If you are only streaming data (eg: pre-encoded material, that is being decoded by the Media PC, or other PC's for audio / video) then, yes, an Intel Pentium II-400 or AMD K6-2 450 would 'suffice fine'.

I suspect many people hear misinterpreted your question(s), and assume this machine will be encoding videos 24/7. (If it is you'll need CPU grunt). Typical 'data only' streaming / file servers should only sit at 30% load with any of the above processors.

When you're converting DVDs into MPEG2, DivX, WMV9, Quicktime, etc use one of your faster machines to perform the rip/re-encode but send the file to a network share on 'this streaming server' machine. A lower end machine will be fine for this role if you do it this way. (The most cost effective way as you already have 2-3 other PCs with decent processors by the sounds of it).

If you are encoding video then you'll need more CPU power no doubt. For encoding audio all the above CPUs will be fine.

There is a difference between encoding & just streaming (already encoded) data. It is not much difference to just copying files from a PC, expect the CPU load to be under 20% on all of the above most of the time.

However, Streaming using Windows Media Encoder is a different kind of streaming and requires a more powerful processor. This is why there is so much conflicting advice being given.

You'll be after a 7,200 rpm HDD, possibly RAID-0, possibly 10,000 rpm (unlikely but it might help. Whichever HDD / mainboard you get make sure they both support NCQ (native command queuing) for performance and longtivity of the HDD.

A Gigabit network interface is also advisable, assuming you have a GbE switch to pair it with. (eg: D-Link DGS-1008).

The decoding of the video/audio is performed at the playback end, not by the server. The encoding is all done beforehand, the only exception is real-time encoding (eg: WME above).

I hope this clears things up.

 

[xwar]

It's starting to get confusing, on another thread some people are saying that I can run a media server using a Pentium 2 400!! ...

And here I've been told that a P4 with 533 FSB might choke ...

I will be streaming DVDs off this server to my Media Centre PC ... and other PCs (my family members will be streaming MP3s off it)

If you are only streaming data (eg: pre-encoded material, that is being decoded by the Media PC, or other PC's for audio / video) then, yes, an Intel Pentium II-400 or AMD K6-2 450 would 'suffice fine'.

I suspect many people hear misinterpreted your question(s), and assume this machine will be encoding videos 24/7. (If it is you'll need CPU grunt). Typical 'data only' streaming / file servers should only sit at 30% load with any of the above processors.

When you're converting DVDs into MPEG2, DivX, WMV9, Quicktime, etc use one of your faster machines to perform the rip/re-encode but send the file to a network share on 'this streaming server' machine. A lower end machine will be fine for this role if you do it this way. (The most cost effective way as you already have 2-3 other PCs with decent processors by the sounds of it).

If you are encoding video then you'll need more CPU power no doubt. For encoding audio all the above CPUs will be fine.

There is a difference between encoding & just streaming (already encoded) data. It is not much difference to just copying files from a PC, expect the CPU load to be under 20% on all of the above most of the time.

However, Streaming using Windows Media Encoder is a different kind of streaming and requires a more powerful processor. This is why there is so much conflicting advice being given.

You'll be after a 7,200 rpm HDD, possibly RAID-0, possibly 10,000 rpm (unlikely but it might help. Whichever HDD / mainboard you get make sure they both support NCQ (native command queuing) for performance and longtivity of the HDD.

A Gigabit network interface is also advisable, assuming you have a GbE switch to pair it with. (eg: D-Link DGS-1008).

The decoding of the video/audio is performed at the playback end, not by the server. The encoding is all done beforehand, the only exception is real-time encoding (eg: WME above).

I hope this clears things up.

Thank you very much for an informative answer ... now i just have to decide whether i will be doing the encoding on my other computer or on the server itself ... decisions to be made.

Thanks!

 

[dvdpiddy]

Out of these chips ...

Intel Pentium 4 506, 2.66 GHz, 64Bit, 1MB L2, 533 MHz FSB, Socket LGA775
$126

vs

Intel Celeron D 336, 2.8 GHz, 64Bit, 256KB L2, 533 MHz FSB, Socket LGA775
$92

vs

AMD Sempron 2800+ 64Bit 1.6GHz Socket 754 256KB L2 Cache
$88.00

Which one is the best choice? in terms of overall best value, performance, heat ...

Thanks!

i like the sempron but it cant stand up agianst a p4 at that speed and cache also have you considered this

 

[xwar]

Out of these chips ...

Intel Pentium 4 506, 2.66 GHz, 64Bit, 1MB L2, 533 MHz FSB, Socket LGA775
$126

vs

Intel Celeron D 336, 2.8 GHz, 64Bit, 256KB L2, 533 MHz FSB, Socket LGA775
$92

vs

AMD Sempron 2800+ 64Bit 1.6GHz Socket 754 256KB L2 Cache
$88.00

Which one is the best choice? in terms of overall best value, performance, heat ...

Thanks!

i like the sempron but it cant stand up agianst a p4 at that speed and cache also have you considered this

I would consider the 3000+ however, it is quite a far bit over my budget, the prices I listed where in Canadian dollars, so the $120 for the 3000+ would actually be closer to 170 bucks Canadian.

 

[parlee]

see how much a 2800+ is in canada, it should be closer to 130 2800+ has been out for ages

 

[mdd1963]

" but I gotta tell ya, that was one quick little chip."

A Celeron D at 3.2 Ghz or so is indeed fast enough for office work, but it is routinely manhandled by Socket 754 Semprons at 2800+ ratings pretty easily...

(I'd prob go with the P4, hoping for it to insanely OC to 800 MHz FSB...)

 

[WINDSHEAR]

I'd go for the P4,... in terms of power and speed. Definitely quicker.

 

[CompGeek]

Cmon don't get shitty peeps.
In a fraze if you want some performance go for P4 otherwise sempron or celeron.
A 3ghz P4 should not have big heating issues and definitely will beat (or overall beat) ANY semprons or celerons.
There is a big gap between mainstream CPUs and budget ones. I guarantee you that the manufactereurs aren't making a good product for cheap prices.
The price difference is worth it(also, you might wanna chose AMD 3000 Venice core).
Put a good cooler and you'll reach very good speeds.

 

[xwar]

see how much a 2800+ is in canada, it should be closer to 130 2800+ has been out for ages

Well I've been looking for that chip too, however, I can't seem to find it anywhere.

 

[xwar]

I think out of the three, I will be getting the P4 at $126 or the a sub-$100 Sempron. 2800+ A64 would be good if I could only locate it.

I am not planning to overclock any of these chips, I want it to run cool, stable, and quiet.

 

[parlee]

if u live close to US it might be easiest to go to some shop on the border and pick up a 2800+, they will be within ur budget and is faster than any of the chips uve meantioned...