Tom's Hardware Forums » CPU & Components » CPUs » Athlon XP 2200+ or Celeron 2.66GHZ???
 

Athlon XP 2200+ or Celeron 2.66GHZ???

Add a reply



 Word :   Username :  
 
Bottom
Author
 Thread : Athlon XP 2200+ or Celeron 2.66GHZ???
 
Profile: newbie
More Information

I know these are SUPER old. I came across a free computer box. I now have 2 old computers. I can choose to make one good, and throw the old one out. I need this for music editing, but really dont need it for anything very advanced. Which of the 2 processors will be fastest? The 2200 is 1.8GHZ, celeron is 2.66, but I know celerons are super crappy. Both computer are HP, so I can't just overclock the Celeron, unless you can give me a link on how to overclock on HP boards.

Thanks for the help

Related Pr oduct
Register or log in to remove.

Master-de-bater
Profile: Eternal Poster
More Information

Amd Athlon XP 2200+ is a lot better. Celeron just suck.

So here's the thing!
Profile: addict
More Information

I was surprised that the athlon xp 2500 and 2200 are still pretty good for a lor of things, my nephew games on a xp2500, and i just fixed a 2200 for a friend, still some umph in those xp's. celerons always have and always will suck period.


---------------
Q6600 (overclocked to 3ghz) GAp35-DS-3L mobo, 4BG corsair ddr2800, 9600gt(512mb), 2x dvd burner,250gb hard drive,500gb hard drive, black antec p182 case with corsair 750 watt psu. 2nd pc Dell 1505 core duo laptop, 2gb, 120gb hard drive ,combo drive.
Profile: enthusiast
More Information

You're both wrong. The Athlon 64 would be faster than the OP's Celeron D 2.66 but the Athlon XP isn't.

http://www23.tomshardware.com/cpu_2004.html

There is not a direct CPU comparison so compare the Athlon XP 2400+ and the Celeron D 2.8 on the charts.


---------------
q6600|Asus P5K|2x2GB G.Skill PC6400|2x320MB 7200.10|8800GT SC|Zalman ZM600
Profile: stranger
More Information

On average, going through the benchmarks, it would seem that the two would be equal, though with the DDR factored into the equation, in windows in general I always found the Athlon XP to be superior to the celerons.

Alright, this is just my opinion, but Ive built a number of 2nd-hand systems from spare parts and I'd go with an Athlon XP any day - actually, Im still running an Athlon xp 2200+ on my bedroom PC and find it more than adequate.


---------------
Athlon x2 6000+, 2Gb DDR2 800, 2 Samsung 250Gb IDEs, Samsung 500Gb SATA, MSI K9A Platinum, Powercolor HD 3850 PCS, OCZ Modstream 520W, LG SATA DVD-R, Thermaltake Armour, CoolDrive 4 fan controller, 21" BenQ LCD, Logitech MX Revolution Mouse, Logitech G25
Profile: enthusiast
More Information

thats not a fair comparison as the Celeron D has a different core, does it not? I know I had a Athlon XP 2500+ and a Celeron 2.5 and the athlon smoked the piss out of the Celeron, and I am talking leaps and bounds faster. But what they hey, if you have the time, build one, bench it, then swap mobos, and bench the other. I am fairly much willing to bet that for something such as music editing the Athlon will most likely be faster as it will benefit from the higher end features of the chip.


---------------
"In life you get no second chances, only the chance to make the same mistake twice."
Profile: stranger
More Information

Thank you.

People are too quick to put down AMD just because of the current state of affairs. When the Athlon xp was out, an Athlon 2000+ xp would totally vapourize a Pentium 2Ghz, never mind a Celeron.

Given today's apps, the Athlon XP may seem behind the the times, but you can still run XP on it, do normal stuff like the net, and even some of the older games like Medal of Honour (Half-Life 2 with a dedicated graphics card).

We're not talking about the 486 here, we're talking about the predecessor to the Athlon 64, which despite the C2D, is still a decent performer.

SERIOUSLY, unless you have a SERIOUS Intel fetish, go with the Athlon XP, you'll be glad you did.

P.S. That is not a flame on the current Intel processors, before anyone starts.


---------------
Athlon x2 6000+, 2Gb DDR2 800, 2 Samsung 250Gb IDEs, Samsung 500Gb SATA, MSI K9A Platinum, Powercolor HD 3850 PCS, OCZ Modstream 520W, LG SATA DVD-R, Thermaltake Armour, CoolDrive 4 fan controller, 21" BenQ LCD, Logitech MX Revolution Mouse, Logitech G25
Profile: enthusiast
More Information

liquidx wrote :

thats not a fair comparison as the Celeron D has a different core, does it not? I know I had a Athlon XP 2500+ and a Celeron 2.5 and the athlon smoked the piss out of the Celeron, and I am talking leaps and bounds faster. But what they hey, if you have the time, build one, bench it, then swap mobos, and bench the other. I am fairly much willing to bet that for something such as music editing the Athlon will most likely be faster as it will benefit from the higher end features of the chip.



It IS a fair comparison; the OP said his Celeron was a 2.66, which means it can ONLY be a Celeron D.

I agree with you that the Athlon XP would be better than the crappy old Celerons with 128k (you've gotta be kidding me!) cache. The 2.5 you spoke of was one of those POS's.


---------------
q6600|Asus P5K|2x2GB G.Skill PC6400|2x320MB 7200.10|8800GT SC|Zalman ZM600
Profile: enthusiast
More Information

mcneillm wrote :

an Athlon 2000+ xp would totally vapourize a Pentium 2Ghz



The 2000+ is generally a little faster but it does not 'vapourize' a P4 2.0.

Try google. You'll find many comparisons between the two.


---------------
q6600|Asus P5K|2x2GB G.Skill PC6400|2x320MB 7200.10|8800GT SC|Zalman ZM600
Profile: stranger
More Information

I don't know about google comparisons, but I remember in PC Pro and other publications at the time, and overall the Athlon XP had a considerable lead over the Pentium.

that said, they weren't going by synthetic benchmarks, which would probably increase its lead more, but by a mixture of applications and games benchmarks.

I'm not saying the Pentium at the time was useless, but the Athlon XP WAS fast, and still is, for the ordinary home user, i.e., not one of us, the enthusiast market.


---------------
Athlon x2 6000+, 2Gb DDR2 800, 2 Samsung 250Gb IDEs, Samsung 500Gb SATA, MSI K9A Platinum, Powercolor HD 3850 PCS, OCZ Modstream 520W, LG SATA DVD-R, Thermaltake Armour, CoolDrive 4 fan controller, 21" BenQ LCD, Logitech MX Revolution Mouse, Logitech G25
Profile: newbie
More Information

I had no experience with the Celeron, however I just ran the computer with the 2200+ and it was quite speedy. I think I'll just stick with it. What should I do with a 2.66GHZ celeron processor laying about?

Ah, just as a side story:

The HP computer was a cheapo. When I was messing about inside i found that the processor fan had a housing that led it directly to the case fan. Pretty good for cooling right? Wrong, they had put the case fan connection in backwards so it was blowing hot air right back at the processor!!! DOH! I guess when you buy cheap you get cheap!


Message edited by dldude on 08-30-2007 at 02:02:49 AM
Profile: Honorary Poster
More Information

The Celeron D 330 (2.66GHz) is a much better CPU for this kind of work than the XP 2200+. Netburst thrives on media encoding/transcoding work, and a fast SSE2 and SSE3 (nieither of which the XP has) will come in handy with most music programs.


As to your observations about the CPU/Chassis fan, I've seen it both ways. Dell fans always suck air out of the box, but I've seen plently of old HP Pavilion minitowers with ducted fans blowing inward. My old HP Pavilion with a 900MHz Slot-A Tbird has a setup like this, where the case fans actually pushes air in.


Go to:
Add a reply
  Tom's Hardware Forums » CPU & Components » CPUs » Athlon XP 2200+ or Celeron 2.66GHZ???
 

Google Ads
Ad
News

AMD rolls out new mobile Athlons

Published on July 19, 2004

AMD today announced new processors for notebooks. The Mobile Athlon 64 processor 3400+ extends the product line on the top-end, the XP-M 2200+ allows AMD to enter the Tablet PC market. Read more

Intel to cut Celeron D processor prices up to 13 percent, AMD to follow

Published on June 29, 2005

On the heels of introducing support for extended memory 64 technology (Intel EM64T), or 64-bit memory addressability, to its Celeron line with the its Celeron D 351, Intel plans to cut the prices of its desktop-use Celeron D processors 5.4-13.5% on July 24, according to PC makers. Read more

Tyan unveils nForce Pro mobos

Published on January 25, 2005

Tyan today launched a pair of motherboards based on Nvidia's recently announced PCI Express-based nForce Pro 2200 and 2050 chipsets, both geared to workstation and server systems based on AMD's 64-bit processors. Read more

Intel to introduce Celeron M 410 series for embedded applications

Published on May 19, 2006

On 28 May, the day when the Intel 65nm Celeron D CPU lineup is set to be launched and the chip giant's expected price cuts for Core Duo processors takes place, Intel will add the Celeron M 410 to augment its current low-end 65nm Celeron M CPU offerings, according to sources at motherboard makers. Read more

Latest Reviews & Articles

Four GeForce 9600 GT Cards Compared

Published on September 26, 2008

Manufacturers really love the first Geforce 9. The graphic chip is fast, the cards are inexpensive, and some retailers offer more than ten variations. Read more

Maxtor's Shared Storage Does NAS At Home

Published on September 25, 2008

What do you do with all the data you collect at home? Network attached storage is the solution. We test Maxtor's Shared Storage II and find that it is also suitable for use in small businesses. Read more

SLI & Centrino 2: Gaming Laptops Battle

Published on September 24, 2008

Take four gaming laptops. Arm two of them with SLI and make the others Centrino 2-compatible. You're looking at a high-end collection of the latest mobile technology battling it out for benchmark supremacy and your hard-earned dollars. Read more

1,000 GB: Three Samsung TB Drives

Published on September 23, 2008

Storage vendors split the desktop hard drive market into performance, mainstream, and energy-efficient products. We looked at Samsung’s Spinpoint F, the RAID version and the EcoGreen F to discover how a 1,000 GB drive differs from another. Read more