Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question
Closed

Whats Better Mobile: Intel Celeron 900 2.2Ghz or AMD Dual-Core Athlon

Last response: in CPUs
Share
November 7, 2009 1:31:24 PM

Which notebook as the better processor and machine.

$298 - HP Intel Celeron Processor 900 (2.2 ghz), with 3gigs or ram, 250 gig harddrive, dvd burner, 15.6 inch display

$349 - Acer AMD Dual-Core Athalon 1.2Ghz, 4 gigs ram, 250 gig harddrive, dvd burner, 15.6 inch display.

I have both and want to know which one to return. Both have Windows 7 Home Premium installed.
a b à CPUs
November 7, 2009 6:50:15 PM

What model laptops are these?
Score
0
November 7, 2009 6:53:07 PM

tortnotes said:
What model laptops are these?


The HP is G60-519WM - The WM means Walmart exclusive.

The Acer model number is: AS5534-1096
Score
0
Related resources
a b à CPUs
November 7, 2009 9:04:03 PM

Well, since you have both, check whether you can feel any difference between them. If the Celeron is a single core, then keep the Athlon.
Also test how long the battery lasts on each, and stress it with something like nero converting and see which ends the task faster.
Score
0
November 8, 2009 3:32:56 AM

That Celeron is a dual core chip and should be noticeably faster than the Acer. Also, I'd pick up an HP laptop any day over an Acer. I know several people that got that $298 HP this morning. My vote goes for returning the Acer for price AND performance reasons.
Score
0
November 8, 2009 1:46:16 PM

rodney_ws said:
That Celeron is a dual core chip and should be noticeably faster than the Acer. Also, I'd pick up an HP laptop any day over an Acer. I know several people that got that $298 HP this morning. My vote goes for returning the Acer for price AND performance reasons.



oh I thought all Celerons were single core. If it was dual core wouldn't that be Core 2 duo chip?
Score
0
a b à CPUs
November 8, 2009 2:05:29 PM

rodney_ws said:
That Celeron is a dual core chip and should be noticeably faster than the Acer. Also, I'd pick up an HP laptop any day over an Acer. I know several people that got that $298 HP this morning. My vote goes for returning the Acer for price AND performance reasons.


Actually it's a single core Celeron and almost certainly a lot slower than the Athlon.

http://ark.intel.com/Product.aspx?id=41498

The HP has intel graphics...enough said. The 3200 in the Acer is about 5x more powerful.

Furthermore, HP build awful computers - 3gb of RAM? I bet that is dual channel and actually operating worse than 2gb would on the same machine...and come on 'walmart exclusive' what do you expect?

What reason exactly do you have for picking a HP laptop over an Acer again?
Score
0
November 8, 2009 2:09:54 PM

It was just the price at that time. and I just found that link you provided five mins ago to tell me it was a single core (that I expected). So I should drop this HQ back to walmart and hold on to the Acer.

I will still be on the hunt from now till black friday for a better notebook with a better deal.

How bad is the AMD processor? Or will it work for simple internet usage?
Score
0
November 8, 2009 2:17:17 PM

I could have sworn it was a dual core... I Googled it at work for a co-worker who was asking about that laptop. OOOPS!
Score
0
November 8, 2009 2:51:48 PM

but an AMD Atalon x2 64 running at 1.2Ghz is that still faster than a celeron running at 2.2Ghz??
Score
0
a b à CPUs
November 8, 2009 3:04:14 PM

Quote:
"A variety of CPU options are available with Congo laptops, but Acer has opted to use the new Athlon X2 L310. This has a relatively modest clock speed of 1.2GHz but, as it's a dual-core offering, it promises better performance--particularly in multitasking scenarios--than we've seen from equivalent Intel solutions."


I don't think there is much doubt that the Acer is worth the extra. Ditch the HP, they make dire computers period.
Score
0
a b à CPUs
November 8, 2009 4:03:36 PM

The Athlon X2 will be faster then the Celeron at 2.2GHz even with its 1.2GHz clockspeed because it is a dual-core. Either way, you shouldn't be expecting good videogame performance or video transcoding performance, but if you browse, check mails, or view HD movies (yes, it's possible with that hardware); you'll be just fine. After all, what could you expect froma a notebook?
Score
0
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
July 4, 2010 6:30:30 AM

Thread has been dormant for a while, but I come to it, reading jennyh saying that HP make awful laptops.

I don't want to see that, having suffered a most terrible Acer machine (which I type this on) for more than a year, and just as I am intending to upgrade to a 2.7 Ghz HP Pavilion laptop.

The Acer has and AMD Turion dual core and 4 GB DDR2 Ram standard (Acer 5535). Acer have done wonderful things with the 768p HD widescreen (15.6) display - it is really lovely indeed and I would choose the display over any other laptop computer model on any day.

However that won't ever be happening, because the huge shame is that the Acer machine just can't do anything. If I want to marvel at the nice Acer display in video, I will have to do it as if I were looking at low resolution photographs, because at times there is rarely more than one frame per second. I first wondered what was wrong with the machine when I tried Microsoft Word 2007 on it - I have never experienced a slower word processor on a completely fresh and empty dual hard drive machine (but for the system / os data). I wondered if there would be any point in putting more than a few gigabytes on the 250 gb hard drive (222 after system / os data).

There is a lot of data on the 2 hard drives now, but it is so slow often.

I just read an old forum post in AVForums of an Acer latpop being "Epicly slow". And I laughed, because it is a really appropriate word. The epic you'll be watching in 720p HD video on the Acer is the amazing slowness, pausing, shutting down and often 1 frame per 7 seconds. Thankfully there is some use for the display in film terms - and that is that you can appreciate the very good display in watching a DVD disc. But even still, recently it is becoming fraught to switch on and watch a DVD film - jerky, stalling, pausing, delayed, unsynced some times.

I think I will go for the HP, because there is no other 4gb dual core 2.7 ghz option out there at anything near such a low price (around £590 in UK - UK prices are generally substantially higher for laptops anyway). Even in a Walmart clearance, it is unbelievable in UK to be able to buy a 2.2 ghz machine (even if it is Celeron) or a dual core ram machine for less than £200.
Score
0
a b à CPUs
October 5, 2010 10:41:36 AM

This topic has been closed by Mousemonkey
Score
0
!