Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

AMD or Celeron

Last response: in CPUs
Share
November 3, 2003 5:45:05 PM

What is best for a "non-gameing" work computer?
AMD XP 2000 with DDR memory pc3200 or Celeron 2,4 Ghz Memory pc2700.

More about : amd celeron

November 3, 2003 5:48:31 PM

the xp2000 would be faster. And why get pc3200 with it? Unless you wanna overclock you could just get some cheaper pc2700.
November 3, 2003 6:23:00 PM

Almost always AMD, hell anything is better than celery.

Shadus
Related resources
November 3, 2003 6:32:06 PM

If you want a solid, stable and RELIABLE system then get the Celeron since you're not gonna be gaming. You're not gonna notice the speed difference.

<b>P4 2.4C @ 3.0GHz 1.525V Stock HSF * Abit IS7 BIOS v1.3 * Corsair XMS 2x256MB PC3200 2-3-3-6 * GeForce4 Ti4200 AGP8X 128MB * SB Audigy 2 ZS * Logitech Z-680 THX 5.1 * Seagate Barracuda 80GB SATA</b>
November 3, 2003 6:38:02 PM

AMD has not had any reliability problems since before 2000. Why in hell someone would recommend a cely is beyond me... 'hey dood get the more expensive, slower product cause its leet an it rawks'.

<font color=blue>
"Some men see things as they are and ask why. Others dream things that never were and ask why not " <b>--</b> <i><font color=red> George Bernard Shaw</i></font color=red></font color=blue>
November 3, 2003 7:08:42 PM

We don't agree on alot of things snork, but Im with you there. The P4 celery's suck hard. They're absolute junk...

Shadus
November 3, 2003 10:12:49 PM

AMD not having qulaity problems is like saying KIA doesn't either. BTW the 2.4Celeron and 2000XP are the same price so the Celeron doesn't cost more. Ozzit, if you get the 2000XP make sure the retailer has a money back guarantee cause you'll probably end up going with the Celeron.

<b>P4 2.4C @ 3.0GHz 1.525V Stock HSF * Abit IS7 BIOS v1.3 * Corsair XMS 2x256MB PC3200 2-3-3-6 * GeForce4 Ti4200 AGP8X 128MB * SB Audigy 2 ZS * Logitech Z-680 THX 5.1 * Seagate Barracuda 80GB SATA</b>
November 3, 2003 10:24:31 PM

If there's any chance that you might ever need BALLS in ur system, get the Athlon. In terms of stability, you probably won't even notice the difference between them - I don't know anyone who hasn't overclocked their Athlons and who's experienced stability issues.

Athlon XP 2400+ @ 2160 180 FSB
GF4 Ti4200 @ 275/575
GA-7N400Pro2
1GiG Kingston PC3200 @ 432MHz (Dual Channel)
November 3, 2003 11:29:42 PM

WTF if have seen benchies with a celron at 3ghz (oced) being beaten in benchmarks by a axp 1600+ cut the crap man amd has NO quality control problems and offer a solid warantee on their retail products.

Newbies reading this forum dont listen to this guy he is obviously an intel fanboy.


If it isn't a P6 then it isn't a procesor
110% BX fanboy
November 4, 2003 5:19:35 AM

You must be either drunk or plain stupid. There is no other explanation for someone recomending a Celeron over an Athlon XP. And what's that all [-peep-] you are talking about? AMD has quality problems? Do YOU even believe what you are saying or are you just trying to get a little bit attention here?
November 4, 2003 5:21:18 AM

In fact, I don't know anyone who did overclock an Athlon XP (and knew what he was doing) and had any stability issues for that matter!
November 4, 2003 6:24:18 AM

I'm not a fanboy dude. AMD, been there done that, paid the price for it. Just letting people know what they are getting into. There is nothing wrong with the Celeron for a non-gaming system. Of course the athlon will be better for a gaming system. If you want a nice furnace for your room and case that sounds like a leaf blower then by all means get the AMD.
November 4, 2003 7:23:26 AM

Leaf blower? Having used both a leaf blower and several computers I can assure you that both AMD and Intel fans are quieter than leaf blowers. They are also quieter than hair dryers, washing machines, and the loose belt on my neighbors car that screams every time they start it up. Several months ago when my boss asked me if he should get a celery or an AMD for his office I told him to go AMD and he hasn't had a problem. There isn't anything to worry about.
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
a b } Memory
November 4, 2003 7:37:00 AM

You are a fudding fanboy; no one else would recommend crappy Celeron over an AXP for *anything*. Its way, way waaay slower, and it feels even more slower with its tiny cache, its more expensive and unlike your claims, its hotter. TDP of a 2.4 Celeron is 59.8W, while a 2000+ tbred is 55.9, and a 2500+ barton is 53.7W. Noise and heat will be a result of the HSF you use, but the celeron is hotter (slower, and more expensive).

= The views stated herein are my personal views, and not necessarily the views of my wife. =
November 4, 2003 8:49:41 AM

I have a PAL XP2100+ in my system; a good copper heatsink and a undervolted fan keep it nice and stable @ 17 degrees C above ambient. If I need to do anything intensive, I will up the voltage slightly on the heatsink fan and switch on the 120mm 'refresh' fan on the side of my case. That is quiet too; the loudest thing in my system is the HDD.

AMD's reliability/heat issues are a thing of the past, just like fanboys & idiots.

"Some mice have two buttons. Macintosh has one. So it's extremely difficult to push the wrong button." - Apple ad. circa 1984.
November 4, 2003 9:30:11 AM

Quote:
a thing of the past, just like fanboys & idiots.

While you're certainly right that AMD's problems (reliability/heat ones that is) are long gone, sadly fanboys seem to still be enjoying their blinkered existence, and idiots... well I don't think the human race has ever been without them :smile: ... But at least they tend to make you laugh from time to time.

Another vote for AMD here... Seriously the choice given in the thread topic is a severe no-brainer.

---
<font color=red>The preceding text is assembled from information stored in an unreliable organic storage medium. As such it may be innacurate, incomplete, or completely wrong</font color=red> :wink:
November 4, 2003 11:09:01 AM

Celerons are for girls...

It's all Bush's fault...all of it...
November 4, 2003 12:54:43 PM

> Newbies reading this forum dont listen to this
> guy he is obviously an intel fanboy.

Don't insult the intel fanboys most of THEM aren't THAT damn stupid.

Shadus
November 4, 2003 7:24:40 PM

Thx for all replyies...
but i still don´t know what to but, i guess it will be a celeron because i don´t want a gameing computer just a stable computer, Some of you thinks the AMD is beating the celeron and some celeron beats AMD.
I guess it is not very big difference and i have a pentium now and it works find (just to slow), I think celeron is good for me
November 4, 2003 7:51:03 PM

There was ONE <i>idiot</i> who recommended a cely. This post was'nt legit from the beginning.

<font color=blue>
"Some men see things as they are and ask why. Others dream things that never were and ask why not " <b>--</b> <i><font color=red> George Bernard Shaw</i></font color=red></font color=blue>
November 4, 2003 7:53:34 PM

Only one person on this thread recommends a Celeron over an AMD XP. Given the choice, I would also take an Athlon XP over a Celeron any day.

Stability is NOT an issue... so long as you get a decent motherboard. If you go with a cheap mobo... you get what you pay for. You'll want a nVidia nForce2-based board for sure... I'd stay away from Via (stability issues from things I've heard) or SiS (too slow).

With this in mind, you'll be able to build a decent system that will do EVERYTHING (including gaming). It will be stable and fast... what more could you ask for? Don't tell me you don't want a gaming machine... everyone plays the odd game... so why not build yourself something with that in mind?

<font color=red> If you design software that is fool-proof, only a fool will want to use it. </font color=red>
November 4, 2003 8:06:58 PM

If you are so stupid, to choose a Celeron over an Athlon XP, because only one person reccomended it, then be my guest. It's your money and it's your choice how to spend it. But honestly I feel sorry for guys like you. It is VERY easy to find the answer to your question by visiting a couple of webpages. When I spend my money, I make sure I get the best I can with that money, especially when it comes to computer hardware. Btw, may I suggest an FX 5800 Ultra along with that excellent CPU you got yourself there?
November 4, 2003 9:20:36 PM

Hmm, some people in this thread have been getting too emotional. Sorry if anyone's called you stupid or been insulting...
Here's the bottom line: the AMD will outperform the Celeron hands down and it is as stable. I have owned an AMD 1.2Ghz computer since 2001 and it has never had an issue b/c hardware (hell, I even got the new AMD760 chipset when it came out and all was fine!) Since then I have built several systems for friends, and beleive me I don't have time to go help em so anything less than stable is out of the picture. In all cases I have used AMD- 1 XP1700 syste, 2 XP1900 systems, 1 XP2400, 1 XP2500, and several others that won't come to the top of my head. Also, some time ago I was asked to build an AMD system as a sort of test for a trading company...it's still there and they are loving the FPU.
I'd go with the AMD since you get more out the product for the same money.

The one and only "Monstrous BULLgarian!"
November 4, 2003 9:41:09 PM

Ehhhh....ONE PERSON SAID TO GET THE CELERON. I have never heard of any recent (as in the past 3 years) AMD reliability issues. Aditionally, a Celeron is one of the worst computer products money can buy (except a Mac). Athlons are good processors (oh yeah, I'm an Intel fan [as long as it isn't a celeron], too), especially for a low-priced, low-performance computer. Listen to the majority of the people here.

RDRAM = (ENEMY)^2
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
a b } Memory
November 4, 2003 9:46:49 PM

Did you come here for advice ? or just to troll ? You got your advice, do with it what you like, but if you arent going to listen, then why ask in the first place ? Oh well, enjoy your celeron.. make sure you get a matching pair of SDRAM modules with them and a 5400 rpm harddisk.

= The views stated herein are my personal views, and not necessarily the views of my wife. =
November 4, 2003 10:17:27 PM

heheheh, sdram, uhuhuhuuhuu <---buthead laugh

wpdclan.com cs game server - 69.12.5.119:27015
November 4, 2003 10:44:35 PM

"especially for a low-priced, low-performance computer" shhhhh ur gonna start a flame war.

The one and only "Monstrous BULLgarian!"
November 4, 2003 10:45:20 PM

5.4K disks pwn all other doorstops!

The one and only "Monstrous BULLgarian!"
November 4, 2003 10:49:10 PM

BTW, can we view the situation logically:
1)Person comes to the forums asks which of 2 similarly priced procs to get.
2)People say get an AMD, 1 chooses to stand out and says get celeron. Result-> flaming
3)Initial person who asked question comes back and says since performance doesn't matter all that much (as long as Windows works quickly) and nothing super serious has been presented against the Celery (ie it'll blow up ur block) said person says he has a tendency to go to the Celeron because he/she has used Intel in the past and been happy with it.
4)People call said person a troll/stupid/idiot

Come on now, what name are we giving to the forums if we cannot help a person without insulting?
Everyone take a chill pill.

The one and only "Monstrous BULLgarian!"
November 5, 2003 12:04:49 AM

i must say something here, for over a year my wife and i both ran 1.4ghz tualatin core celerons, i used mine for flight sims and she used hers for publishing programs,and we both surfed the web and other things, both had 512mb sdram, 7200rpm seagate ataIII baracuda drives, 24x sony cd burners,geforce2 mx 400 vid cards, soundblaster live digital soundcards, Aopen mx34-u motherboards(in fact im just now selling hers after upgrading it to an athlon 1600XP, this was done to take advantage of ddr sdram) and they never gave us one ounce of trouble! they were quick,and stable as hell! and never lagged in our use,i have always been a big beleiver in building with quality parts, and all my systems, whether for my own use, or customers, are rock solid. the tualatin core celerons are great! they have 256k L2 cache! the only thing that some consider a drawback is the 100mhz fsb, while the p3 counterpart is at 133mhz, the celerons at the time were cheaper than the athlons AT THAT TIME, may be different now, but they still are pretty competatively priced, and i also know that he was talking about the new celerons, but i felt he shouls consider the older tualatin core celerons, as they are a very good alternative for an inexpensive office system. ok, that said, i await my flaming like a man!(cowers and begs for mercy):) 

Fat, Drunk, and Stupid is no way to go through life Son.
November 5, 2003 12:28:15 AM

Either way he goes, it'll be a low performance computer, but if he goes with some celery, it won't be as good a computer in terms of price:p erformance.

RDRAM = (ENEMY)^2
November 5, 2003 12:45:01 AM

came here for same question. these replies make me ask
figuring comparable cel 1.7 or 2.0 to an amd based on price, is there some links to hard data on the benchmarking (non gaming) and more importantly judging by some posts here, the noise and heat output comparisons.

Also, doesn't this site have some benchmarking pages? someone point me there please.

found some, with search of cpu comparison keywords.

Also an article on heating
http://www.tomshardware.com/cpu/20010917/heatvideo-02.h...
<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by rocco on 11/04/03 09:46 PM.</EM></FONT></P>
November 5, 2003 1:42:34 AM

And he probably won't notice the difference.

The one and only "Monstrous BULLgarian!"
November 5, 2003 1:49:20 AM

You never know, he might do something performance oriented once in a while. Depends on what though--MP3 encoding will be direly slow on the 2000+ while gaming will be headache inducing on the celery.

RDRAM = (ENEMY)^2
November 5, 2003 2:19:19 AM

he said non gamer work computer, ie used for Word, internet, email, Excel, Powerpoint.

The one and only "Monstrous BULLgarian!"
November 5, 2003 2:42:13 AM

hmmm
even so one has to recommend the XP.
The only thing the celleron is good for is Purely CPU intensive work.

Anything else it gasps for cache and memory bandwidth it just doesnt have.

<b>I am not a AMD fanboy.
I am not a Via fanboy.
I am not a ATI fanboy.
I AM a performance fanboy.
And a low price fanboy. :smile:
Regards,
Mr no integrity coward.</b>
November 5, 2003 6:21:50 AM

Ok if you keep your fact Look for tha Athlon with .13 Micron. They are cooler. Now if you get the .18 Microns they seem to run Hotter so do the celeron at .18 Microns. So if you want a Heater Look for the Die Size.
November 5, 2003 6:51:42 AM

An XP will destroy a celeron performance wise. A Duron would be a better choice than a celeron. The moral to the story is the past 12 months have shown that intel are second in both performance and price. If you dont require a gaming machine get a Duron or a cheap pentium 3 if you can find one but basically avoid intel for the time being unless your looking to the high end of the market and even then your still paying a premium.


If he doesn't die, he'll get help!!!
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
a b } Memory
November 5, 2003 7:48:46 AM

I've had a somewhat different experience with a friends computer; without asking advice, she bought a tualatin Celeron 1.2 GHz, and it felt slow as hell. I mean, way slower than a what I had at the time: an overclocked Duron 600. Now this was probably due to the worthless motherboard (ALI chipset I think) and crap harddisk, but let me assure you even she (not being a power user or gamer at all) was NOT satisfied with it.

Anyway, point is, Celeries might be okay and good enough for certain tasks; but it still makes no sense to get one, when the same ammount of money can buy you a far superior Athlon setup. A Yugo will get you from home to the grocery store and back, but why buy a Yugo when you can get a Toyota for the same money ?

= The views stated herein are my personal views, and not necessarily the views of my wife. =
November 5, 2003 11:02:02 AM

> tualatin core celerons

There is the key words. Those WERE good celery. The new p4 ones are utter junk.

Shadus
November 5, 2003 11:05:35 AM

> she bought a tualatin Celeron 1.2 GHz, and it
> felt slow as hell. Now this was probably due to
> the worthless motherboard (ALI chipset I think)
> and crap harddisk

Almost for sure. Those were the pretty good Celery chips really.


Shadus
November 5, 2003 2:22:34 PM

Wow, too bad I missed this epic battle. If he seriously chooses Celeron, it's his decision to live with. The slower XP's are not as good as the P4's, and the rating system v. Mhz is stupid, inflated and misleading. That doesn't change the fact that the XP is a way better chip for the price and you can find great Socket A motherboards cheap.

Where there's a will, there's a way-even when it comes to screwing up.
November 5, 2003 3:24:51 PM

Nobody cares if ppl recommend celeron or amd. What people get angry with, is when they recommend product with bullshit facts like AMD instabillities. That's what i hate.
November 5, 2003 4:34:49 PM

Exactly! If he says, "I will get a Celeron because I love Intel and I don't like AMD" then I am ok with it, he's got a logic argument there! After all, many times our decisions are not only based on facts but also on emotions. BUT when he comes here saying that he has decided to get the Celeron over the Athlon XP because the XPs have stability issues, then that really pisses me off.
November 5, 2003 5:02:01 PM

I'm not an AMD fanboy either - if I had the money, I would probably buy a 2.4C and overclock it.

Basically, there is a best CPU for whatever amount of money you are willing to spend...

At £50 (UK ex.vat):

XP2400+ (Tbred) versus Celeron 2.4Ghz = AMD win

At £130 (ditto):

XP3000+ (Barton) versus P4 2.8C = Intel win

Celerons are a joke; there is a better AMD proc. available for the same price.



"Some mice have two buttons. Macintosh has one. So it's extremely difficult to push the wrong button." - Apple ad. circa 1984.
November 5, 2003 5:43:43 PM

I have 4 PCs. One is an XP 2000, a p4 1.8 and a p4 1.7 (skt 423), and a Duron 1.6G . The XP 2000 gets too hot, crashes, is very slow, and cannot run Adobe Photoshop 7 on Win 2k without crashing a few times. But the most worrying thing is that it sumtimes resets itself!!! The p4 1.7Ghz gets too hot, is kinda slow, and crahes as much as the Athlon. The p4 1.8Ghz is primed, but too slow. The duron is the cheapest and is the best........

Considering a 2ghz Athlon 64 can sumtimes out pace a 3Ghz PC.......AMD 0wnZ0rZ. BUT, the Intel is very well built. They have the best design, reliability, and compatibility. I used to love AMD for their price. Hell the Duron 1.6 was just $35!!!!!

Go fo neither the Celery or the XP....Duron rulez
November 5, 2003 6:00:34 PM

Hmm, well...
I guess i hade wrong.
AMD is better, I think i buy a AMD
But i have a last question. Is it big difference between XP 2000, XP 2200 and XP 2400?
The XP 2200 costs 10$ more than XP 2000
The XP 2400 costs 10$ more than XP 2200
November 5, 2003 6:21:18 PM

Well, if two out of your four comps are crashing, one intel and one amd, I think that suggests your cooling is rather poor and that if you built the machines you clearly didnt make them very well! You cannot blame instability on a processor. There are many people that run all kinds of machines without any issues.

<A HREF="http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k1=6752830" target="_new">Yay, I Finally broke the 12k barrier!!</A>
November 5, 2003 7:51:49 PM

Quote:
ok, that said, i await my flaming like a man!(cowers and begs for mercy):) 

Don't worry man i'll protect you, my tualatin celeron (1.2) running on my cusl2-c @ 1.6ghz is super fast, with a radeon 9500 i can play modern games at 1024x768 with good frame rates. My only grudge with the tualatins is that their mobos are really expensive (ex tusl2 can run you 80+ $ even today) so you either need to do a socket mod or run a tualatin sloket converter, thats my only gruge. Other than that they are great and run very cool, hell i could cool my tully with the reese's peanut butter cup i am eating right now :eek:  (i might have to try that :evil:  ).




If it isn't a P6 then it isn't a procesor
110% BX fanboy
November 5, 2003 7:54:15 PM

the higher the number the faster the cpu.

ex athlon xp 2000+ is faster than an athlon xp 2200+ (yes those numbers actually mean something!)


If it isn't a P6 then it isn't a procesor
110% BX fanboy
!