Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Celeron 2GHz vs Athlon XP 2200+

Tags:
  • CPUs
  • AMD
  • Windows XP
Last response: in CPUs
Share
July 6, 2004 2:50:40 AM

I built a computer for my friend, an Athlon XP 2200+, with a Soltek KT400 chipset based mobo
Since 1 month, he has been complaining to me that their pc is so slow compare to their laptop which has a Celeron2GHz sitting on it
He had bad experience with all the AMD system he has (K6-2, Duron, Athlon), but all his Intel system rocks, i thought i could change their mind that AMD sucks..
but then now it discourages me, now he is telling me that he will never buy amd again, he sees more power with Intel, and planing to buy an Pentium 4
How could this be happening? A Celeron 2GHz beats an Athlon XP?? even without nForce2, AXP should still be faster right?
All i know is that he is using an old 15Gb HD with Axp, I told him try to run new the 2200+ on a newer/faster hd, then he said he won't spend money anymore on it

............ :eek: 

More about : celeron 2ghz athlon 2200

July 6, 2004 3:09:21 AM

First off, the mobile celerons have more cache than the desktop, so they are better.(than regular celleries).
If you compare the start menus, I think you will find the problem. Get him to load msn messanger on his laptop, and see what happens.
Make sure the xp isn't running at 1.35 gigs (100mhz fsb)
Some people could watch an amd chip finnish a project in half the time of an intel setup, and come up with 6 excuses why the intel is better. Prejudice has many faces.

<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by endyen on 07/05/04 11:10 PM.</EM></FONT></P>
July 6, 2004 3:13:09 AM

theres no way a 2ghz cellery would beat a 2200+


his system isnt setup isnt running at its full potential if this is true, and thast not the fault of the CPU, its the fault of the operating system or the users fault for letting the system get full of crap/spyware/adware/viruss/bloatware

-------
<A HREF="http://www.albinoblacksheep.com/flash/you.html" target="_new">please dont click here! </A>
<A HREF="http://www.subhi.com/keyboard.jpg" target="_new">This is you, interweb junky</A>
Related resources
a b à CPUs
July 6, 2004 3:57:29 AM

I loved AMD until around 1998 when I got a K6-III and VIA MVP3. The thing had problems with just about EVERY video card. Turns out it was the MVP3 chipset. I went to a BX, which put me out of AMD for a while.

Notice I'm not blaming AMD, just shooting your notions out of the water that only people who don't like AMD have problems with AMD systems.

Nearly all AMD system problems can be blamed on VIA.

<font color=blue>Only a place as big as the internet could be home to a hero as big as Crashman!</font color=blue>
<font color=red>Only a place as big as the internet could be home to an ego as large as Crashman's!</font color=red>
July 6, 2004 7:38:41 AM

I'm not trying to establish a fact. Just saying that, many n00bs treat Intel as CPU god. If a problem occurs with their AMD system, then they first blame AMD, then try to find and fix the real problem.

I've used K6-2 with Ali AladinV chipset and it was stable. Though I didn't use VIA MVP3, I've heard from one of my friend that his Shuttle MVP3 mobo often created problems.

------------
<A HREF="http://geocities.com/spitfire_x86" target="_new">My Website</A>

<A HREF="http://geocities.com/spitfire_x86/myrig.html" target="_new">My Rig</A> & <A HREF="http://geocities.com/spitfire_x86/benchmark.html" target="_new">3DMark score</A>
a b à CPUs
July 6, 2004 8:05:39 AM

As I recall, my problem began with a generic Aladin V board that worked stabley but was fairly slow. So I read a bunch of sites like this one, and bought the hot AT board, a FIC VA-503+. And it was VERY fast, and crashed VERY quickly, and took over 2 years of patches and BIOS updates to get to work well enough to sell it! I've had similar experiences with other MVP3 boards, and less sever problems with KT133, 133A, and KT266 boards. Anyway, you have to remember that the MVP3 was updated something like 16 times, or so I heard, so maybe someone who bought one around 2001 with all the BIOS updates and the latest chipset revision didn't experience the problems I had, but by 2001 anything Socket 7 was EXTREMELY dated.

<font color=blue>Only a place as big as the internet could be home to a hero as big as Crashman!</font color=blue>
<font color=red>Only a place as big as the internet could be home to an ego as large as Crashman's!</font color=red>
July 6, 2004 2:31:23 PM

Since I built that pc, i tried to make everything as fast as possible, eg: memory timing is at 2/2/2/5, fsb is surely at 133mhz..
yeah..maybe they simply don't like amd..
July 6, 2004 2:35:54 PM

Quote:
theres no way a 2ghz cellery would beat a 2200+

That's what I thought as well, but he is telling me that in ALL tasks that he is doing, the Celeron2GHz is significantly faster than 2200+, he said it's very slow even he is just editing images.. @#!$$%!...
I asked him what does he mean by slow? then he told me that it freezes all the times, like it took 2 secs for IE to appear, but his Celeron would open IE immediately
I think it's his fault, he said that he uses that PC to download everything, such as BT, and as i said, he uses with an old HD, even though i tried to convince him that it's not the fault of the cpu, he just can't believe it :mad: 
July 6, 2004 2:39:03 PM

I still have my 503+, running great for my dad.

Your point stands though, and is the reason I stick with Intel, rather than AMD, be it for servers, desktops or laptops. Overall, i've always had much better experience with the supporting chipsets for Intel processors than for AMDs. Doesn't mean this will always be true, or is even tru eof every chipset available now, but until personal experience speaks differently it'll be Intel processors and Intel/Serverworks chipsets(and of course big nasty systems for some of server stuff, but Intel for the smaller servers).
July 6, 2004 2:39:46 PM

I've installed VIA 4 in 1 driver, 4.46 if I remember..cuz that's what I installed for my KT333 board, and it works flawlessly
me too, I've been an amd man, not cuz i'm a fan, just because its price/performance ratio, my first K6-2 333MHz, was the fastest cpu among all my friends, i was proud of it :cool: though..I didn't know which chipset it uses, it should be a SiS', but i can't be sure, i didn't know much of computer at that time
July 6, 2004 2:41:52 PM

Don't try to convince him, prove him!

Borrow his PC for a few days and do a fresh WinXP install and update all drivers.

Then give it back with is favorite apps installed, then run side by side test. If he do some Photoshop stuff, run CPU intensive filter on big image. And prove him that the XP 2200+ is faster.

This is the best way to convince him!

--
It's tricky to use words like <b><font color=green>AMD</font color=green></b> or <b><font color=blue>Intel</font color=blue></b> in a signature some users could think your are biased.
July 6, 2004 2:50:57 PM

His first pc was a PentiumIII with a VIA chipset based motherboard, he had a very good experience with it
The other pc he had was a Duron1GHz sitting on an unknown motherboard, which is farily slow compare to his P3 (and crash often!), after I built the 2200+ for him, I bring that Duron home, and examine why it could be slow compare to P3, I found out it's a VIA KT133 based mobo, DFI AK74-C, it can't even recognize the Duron properly, when I booted it, it shows as "AMD Athlon 1000MHz", I loaded the latest Bios, hoping it could recognize it, no luck, still shows as "Athlon 1000MHz"

The first time i used a VIA chipset mobo is a KT333, and I'm still using it..it's fast and stable. From what I heard, VIA is getting better since KT266A, right?

oh, btw, i got another friend, she is using an Athlon XP 1800+ sitting on a VIA KT266A based motherboard, her pc crashed often, like freezes all time, IE, RealPlayer, sometimes, Programs would close "automatically" Could this be a faulty motherboard?
However, she is kind enough, she doesn't blame at all with that, just wondering why this is happening?
July 6, 2004 3:12:42 PM

"The first time i used a VIA chipset mobo is a KT333, and I'm still using it..it's fast and stable. From what I heard, VIA is getting better since KT266A, right?"

I had the same experience with my KT333, great board. Move that women over to one of those.


Mobile XP 2600+ (11X200)
Abit NF7-S v 2.0
Maxtor 60GB ATA 133 7200RPM
512MB Corsair Twinx 3200LL
BBA 9800 Pro
Enermax Noisetaker 420 watts
Win98SE
July 6, 2004 5:16:58 PM

That BX is now dual booting Lycoris Linux and ME, running as file server and old game playing machine @ my house!

[Signature Sux now that all my stuff's old-Damn!] Athlon XP 1900 (11x200) 42C (Load w/AX-7 & 8cm Tornado) - MSI K7N2 Delta - 2x256 Corsair Value PC3200 - Jaton MX440 @ 370/590 - 80Gb WD 8Mb Cache -
July 6, 2004 5:23:40 PM

How much memory does he have w/ the AXP? If it's constantly swapping to HD on an old 15 GB hdd, that would slow it down considerably. Especially if he's running XP, starting MS Messenger @ startup, downloading BT files, and doing anything else at the same time. Odds are he's not using the laptop nearly as heavily. Go to program manager and close everything that's not needed. Then benchmark the two CPU's with Sandra, or something else that does CPU isolating benches. If he doesn't believe the numbers, let him continue feeling the way he does. You can't save everybody all the time!

[Signature Sux now that all my stuff's old-Damn!] Athlon XP 1900 (11x200) 42C (Load w/AX-7 & 8cm Tornado) - MSI K7N2 Delta - 2x256 Corsair Value PC3200 - Jaton MX440 @ 370/590 - 80Gb WD 8Mb Cache -
a b à CPUs
July 7, 2004 12:38:01 AM

If I were to say VIA's turnaround point was the KT266A, I'd be ingnoring a couple really crappy P4 chipsets they made and the K8T800. I'd rather point out that nVidia produces superior chipsets on a regular bases, only had one flawed design (nForce3 150), and admits to their mistakes.

The last part is a HUGE plus for me, because it means I can quit trying to find a solution for a chipset problem and ebay the board instead, saving me a significant amount of time.

<font color=blue>Only a place as big as the internet could be home to a hero as big as Crashman!</font color=blue>
<font color=red>Only a place as big as the internet could be home to an ego as large as Crashman's!</font color=red>
a b à CPUs
July 7, 2004 6:53:18 PM

Yep, and that's why it's flawed.

<font color=blue>Only a place as big as the internet could be home to a hero as big as Crashman!</font color=blue>
<font color=red>Only a place as big as the internet could be home to an ego as large as Crashman's!</font color=red>
July 7, 2004 7:01:26 PM

Any celeron cannot touch an athlon XP above the 2200 line.

Mobile Barton 2500+ @ 2420mhz 11x220 1.7v
Asus A7N8X Dlx 440 FSB
1gb Geil GD pc3500 Dual Channel (2-3-3-6)
Segata 80gb SATA 8.5ms seek
ATI Radeon 9800 Pro to XT(463/795)
July 8, 2004 4:01:41 AM

but nForce3 150 still works quite good no?
a b à CPUs
July 8, 2004 5:55:10 AM

Yes, very nice for a prototype, I'll be glad to see the finished version! Oh, wait, they DO have the finished version, the nForce3 250! LOL

<font color=blue>Only a place as big as the internet could be home to a hero as big as Crashman!</font color=blue>
<font color=red>Only a place as big as the internet could be home to an ego as large as Crashman's!</font color=red>
a b à CPUs
July 8, 2004 7:28:44 AM

If GM was developing a new engine for the Corvette that made 500HP, but released an early version that produced only 250HP, that design would be flawed as a retail product.

nForce3 150 has a broken AGP lock, it was meant to support the 800MHz HT bus but only worked at lower speeds, and was missing several features that nVidia simply didn't have time to incorporate.

<font color=blue>Only a place as big as the internet could be home to a hero as big as Crashman!</font color=blue>
<font color=red>Only a place as big as the internet could be home to an ego as large as Crashman's!</font color=red>
a b à CPUs
July 8, 2004 7:29:37 AM

Oh, and it has problems running low latency RAM.

<font color=blue>Only a place as big as the internet could be home to a hero as big as Crashman!</font color=blue>
<font color=red>Only a place as big as the internet could be home to an ego as large as Crashman's!</font color=red>
July 8, 2004 4:28:49 PM

Tell him to compare the Celeron and Athlon XP. Run Quake III Arena, at default settings, where it will be dependent on CPU not video card. Guaranteed, the XP will win.
a b à CPUs
July 8, 2004 9:43:59 PM

Really? Wait...I already knew that! I already knew that the XP1800+ would beat a Celeron 2.6! W00T. But the last few post have been about chipsets, nVidia has some great ones, SiS has some decent ones, VIA has some crappy ones...and the nForce3 150 wasn't finished IMO when it was released. That leaves the nForce3 250, follows by the SiS 755, followed by the low end nForce3 150 and K8T800. And in XP boards, it's the nForce2 series, followed by the SiS 748, followed by the low end trash. Everything older than that isn't worth discussing any more except as a support issue.

<font color=blue>Only a place as big as the internet could be home to a hero as big as Crashman!</font color=blue>
<font color=red>Only a place as big as the internet could be home to an ego as large as Crashman's!</font color=red>
July 8, 2004 10:17:35 PM

I forgive Nvidia everything for the Nf2...

<font color=blue>The day <font color=green>Microsoft</font color=green> will make something that doesn't suck is the day they'll start making vacuum cleaners.</font color=blue>
July 27, 2004 9:55:56 PM

He ends up bought a Dell Computer, which equiped a Prescot Pentium 4 2.8GHz, I told him to get a Northwood, guess he weren't listening
Now he is claming that his computer is super fast and so silent, no more amd for him in the future
..... :eek: 
!