Which processor is better ?

[littlepaws123]

Which processor is better ?

a) intel pentium D 2.66
b) intel celeron D 3.2

:?

Also does anyone has a list of intel processor stating the highest performance to lowest performance.

Many Thanks

 

[qcmadness]

Which processor is better ?

a) intel pentium D 2.66
b) intel celeron D 3.2

:?

Also does anyone has a list of intel processor stating the highest performance to lowest performance.

Many Thanks

A is better.

 

[littlepaws123]

performance does not appear to be a lot of difference?

 

[qcmadness]

performance does not appear to be a lot of difference?

For single task => difference <20%
But for multi task => different > 40%, even approaches 100%

 

[danny9894]

Which processor is better ?

a) intel pentium D 2.66
b) intel celeron D 3.2

:?

Also does anyone has a list of intel processor stating the highest performance to lowest performance.

Many Thanks

A) just because b is a celeron

 

[m25]

Which processor is better ?

a) intel pentium D 2.66
b) intel celeron D 3.2

:?

Also does anyone has a list of intel processor stating the highest performance to lowest performance.

Many Thanks

You have just mentioned two of the worst CPUs the market has to offer. (BTW, by your question I realize that you believe the CeleronD is dual core; wrong, it has nothing to do with the "D" of the Pentium D, so it's just a crappy intel single core)
1-If your budget for the CPU is around the $100 get an AM2 (the dual core X2 3600+ os only $130 and most of the singlecores are well below $100.
2-Budget is $180 and above, see for the E6300 or above (but that also implies an expensive motherboard.
3-....good luck

 

[r0ck]

Would not have to be expensive if you don't overclock.

 

[TSIMonster]

Both are horrible, end of discussion

 

[m25]

Compared to the ~$50 for what you can find an AM2 board, yes. However, important for him is to stay away from the CeleronD; they're really horrible stuff :|

 

[melarcky]

Both are horrible, end of discussion

Agree, both suck.
yes they both do suck.
but if you have to choose go for the Pentium D, Celeron D is just a scam that intel did to make people think it is a Dual Core...

 

[qcmadness]

Both are horrible, end of discussion

Agree, both suck.
yes they both do suck.
but if you have to choose go for the Pentium D, Celeron D is just a scam that intel did to make people think it is a Dual Core...

The origin for the "D" is that Celeron D is the fourth generation for Celeron
p.s. Actually I don't think that C-D is the fourth generation for Celeron.

 

[m25]

Both are horrible, end of discussion

Agree, both suck.
yes they both do suck.
but if you have to choose go for the Pentium D, Celeron D is just a scam that intel did to make people think it is a Dual Core...
Yes, :lol: , PentiumD means Pentium "Dualcore" but what the heck does the D on the celeron mean :?: :!:

 

[m25]

Both are horrible, end of discussion

Agree, both suck.
yes they both do suck.
but if you have to choose go for the Pentium D, Celeron D is just a scam that intel did to make people think it is a Dual Core...

The origin for the "D" is that Celeron D is the fourth generation for Celeron
Ahaaa,... :lol: , those bastards, I missed the first three letters (If I remember well they were not mentioned except for the A and it went after the GHz rating, like Celeron 300A)

 

[littlepaws123]

Which processor is better ?

a) intel pentium D 2.66
b) intel celeron D 3.2

:?

Also does anyone has a list of intel processor stating the highest performance to lowest performance.

Many Thanks

You have just mentioned two of the worst CPUs the market has to offer. (BTW, by your question I realize that you believe the CeleronD is dual core; wrong, it has nothing to do with the "D" of the Pentium D, so it's just a crappy intel single core)
1-If your budget for the CPU is around the $100 get an AM2 (the dual core X2 3600+ os only $130 and most of the singlecores are well below $100.
2-Budget is $180 and above, see for the E6300 or above (but that also implies an expensive motherboard.
3-....good luck

I realise these are both entry level CPU's but if you were to benchmark them against each other would there be much difference.

Celeron D 3.2 with 256 cache Single core
Pentium D 2.66 with 1mb cache Dual core

The reason I ask is this question is that the Celeron has more Ghz but less cache and the Pentium D has less Ghz but more cache.

Therefore would this balance out so that they are roughly the same performance.

Or is it better to have more cache than Ghz ? :?:

 

[melarcky]

Well from what I know more cache is better when it comes to this Cituation. First of all its a Pentium Vs a Celeron so you should already know where this is going. Also the Pentium is DUAL CORE while the Celeron isnt.
So its more like 2x2.66 1mb Cache vs 1x3.2 256 cache.

 

[Guest]

Realllly depend on the application/games you are using
Just to show you the impact on cache : More cache...

But we are a talking about a tottaly different architecture, these are just to give you ball park idea on what to expect with twice the cache.

If your talking about the Pentium D 805, you can bring it to 3.2ghz on stock cooler without any effort on your part. So that is clearly the superior CPU!

 

[Guest]

Well, if you know how to overclock, then go for the PD. If not, then get AMD, unless you cant get another mobo.

Get PD no matter what.

 

[49ers540]

Both are horrible, end of discussion

Agree, both suck.
yes they both do suck.
but if you have to choose go for the Pentium D, Celeron D is just a scam that intel did to make people think it is a Dual Core...

Yes, such a scam. Look what turtle you are running. Now that's a scam if I do say so.

 

[m25]

"More GHz" like you say counts nothing if the architectures you are comparing are not the same. To make you an example, a 2.6GHz Celeron D is easily outperformed by a 1.6GHz Sempron 3000+(AM2). Even comparing celerons to pentium4s is the same: Once I had a 2.67GHz celeron, sounded good but it was easily put aside by a 2.0GHz P4.
CeleronDs are totally to be avoided. If I were you I'd only consider AM2 or C2D dual cores.

 

[TSIMonster]

"More GHz" like you say counts nothing if the architectures you are comparing are not the same. To make you an example, a 2.6GHz Celeron D is easily outperformed by a 1.6GHz Sempron 3000+(AM2). Even comparing celerons to pentium4s is the same: Once I had a 2.67GHz celeron, sounded good but it was easily put aside by a 2.0GHz P4.
CeleronDs are totally to be avoided. If I were you I'd only consider AM2 or C2D dual cores.

Took the words right outta my mouth. Ghz is only important when you are comparing within a line of processors.

To OP, if you had to pick one, the Celeron would be easily out performed by the 805D. The only thing the P805D is good for is lowering your heating bill.