Now guys, i need to know if this is true or if my friend should change pusher.
A friend of mine told me, as i was asking him about CPUs, that Celeron were better than P III because, he says, if you get a Celeron 700Mhz, for example, well, it runs at 700Mhz...but the P III CPUs only run at half their nomination...example, if you bye a P III 800Mhz, it only runs at 400Mhz...Is my friend right????????
Thanx in advance
Also, for the same money or for cheaper, should i put a Celeron, a P III, a K7 or an Athlon in my new computer?
Is there a stability issue or an overheating issue?
No, your friends a moron. And quit hanging out with him befor it wears off. Stupidity is contagious. The PIII outperforms the Celeron by a long shot, partly due to it's larger cache, partly due to higher bus speed. And most PIII's can be overclocked to 980 or higher, and can handle bus speeds over 150MHz (166MHz bus is common with hardcore overclockers). Celerons are the butt of many jokes on this forum.
Thunderbird Athlons and p3's are very close in most common applications. The Duron is a little slower but a whole lot cheaper, and fabulous to overclock. How bad is the celeron? The 766 is slower than a 600 Duron.
Even a fool, when he remains silent, appears wise.
January 17, 2001 8:59:40 AM
The PIII and the celeron run the same core, the only difference is some of the cache is disabled and teh FSB is lower(except the latest one)in the celery. your friend should stick to eating regular Mushrooms....
Also (personal opinion) I would use an Athlon over a PIII but it does depend on what you want from it..Read the reviews
Read the article up on toms right now about AMD and Pentium. It lists facts and fictions about the Pentiums and the AMD's. Most of the people on this board read the articles on the site. That is how we got here.