Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Hi end vs. Low end

Tags:
  • CPUs
  • Gaming
  • Duron
Last response: in CPUs
Share
December 16, 2001 11:42:44 AM

For the average home user,not heavy into gaming,is there that much difference between a Athlon vs. Duron,or a Celeron vs. Pent.,of approx.the same speed?...I am planning my next pc building project,haven't built one in years,and just looking for some input.I would like to cross the 1 gig threshold,but not sure by how much.........Kinda doing a cost verses need type thing ..Thanks..:) 

If ya don't ask..How ya gonna know.

More about : end low end

December 16, 2001 12:00:16 PM

if its Cost/Preformace you want. forget pentium 4...
intel has a nice litle new celron (with new core) that can do the work at low cost - it's a 1.2GHZ celron and it preforms pretty well... should preform as an athlon clocked that speed....
for a few more bucks you would be able to buy a nice new athlon xp 1600+... it preformes great (about a as a p4 clocked 1.8ghz) and should give you some high-end preformance at low-end price...

eather one (the new 1.2Ghz Celron or athlon xp 1600) will make a good choise these days when you can buy alot of preformance at very low cost...
December 16, 2001 12:12:59 PM

Even if you have only average need, you'll still want a reasonably fast PC to last you a few years. I would seriously aviod the Celeron or Duron unless you want to consider the 1.2GHz Celeron. Even then, it's upgrade path is limited so, I'd just get either a 1.5GHz P4 with 256MB DDR RAM or an Athlon XP 1600+ with 256MB RAM. The Athlon XP, will, of course, be slightly faster, but I'll let you choose between the two.

AMD technology + Intel technology = Intel/AMD Pentathlon IV; the <b>ULTIMATE</b> PC processor
Related resources
December 16, 2001 1:47:49 PM

IIB, i think you gave a wrong information regarding the performance of Celeron 1.2 where you said "it's a 1.2GHZ celron and it preforms pretty well... should preform as an athlon clocked that speed".
Of course this is not true, even Duron 1.2 is better than Celeron 1.2, refer to THG following links: - http://www6.tomshardware.com/cpu/01q4/011116/duron1200-...

http://www6.tomshardware.com/cpu/01q4/011003/duel-03.ht...


I agree with AMD MAN, that when you purchase any system you should keep in mind that you will use it at least for 2 years and maybe more, but in order not to feel your system is slow you have to use at least 256mb ram and choose a good harddrive and fast one (seagate barracuda VI, maxtros D740x, ibm60gxp) all these drive are 7200rpm and ata100 (except the maxtor which 133)

good luck


wish if there was UnDo in the life
December 16, 2001 3:49:09 PM

Well, I would suggest you get the best motherboard first, and then decide the processor. You could be better off with a slightly slower processor if you invest more in your motherboard!

AMD_Man is right, your system should run al least two years, but you could make it last for longer. For example, if you are planning to buy a 1 GHz P3, then I would suggest you go for a better board like the Asus TUSL2-C (if you plan to overclock) or Intel D815EPEA2U and if you get overbudget cut down on your processor, get a 933 or 866 one. Motherboards based on VIA Pro133T or Pro266T are also good enough if they are from a reputable manufacturer.

Now you have a system that is ready for a 1.2 GHz desktop Tualatin which is supposedly the end of the road for desktop models of P3, but also the server version of Tualatin with 512k of L2 cache, already launched at 1.26 GHz and may someday get to 1.6 GHz! Long live your system!

One single blemish on such a superb configuration and its inexplicable why intel did it, is that your system is limited to 512 MB memory!

Dont ever go for a <b>value</b> system unless you are on a tight budget, traditionally it always means <b>cheap and slow</b>!

Everbody knows what next Celeron will be - current Williamette P4 with 400 MHz FSB and 256k L2 cache! Does that mean intel has showed the P4 its place, to the cheap and slow segment? You can judge by yourself when you consider the series of P4 price-cuts during the last year, thrice by 50% or more and twice by 20~30%! No wonder why a processor (P4 1.4 GHz) worth $975 in Oct 2000 comes for $115 today! I wont recommend a P4 to anybody, unless 1. you have a serious application that you are ready to spend a fortune on RDRAM and 2. your application is optimised for P4 SSE2.

P4+SDRAM is not recommended at all, if you are content with its performance then you would be better off with a P3 or even a Celeron based system with similar features, at least you would have some room for expansion!

girish

<font color=red>No system is fool-proof. Fools are Ingenious!</font color=red>
December 16, 2001 7:20:20 PM

Well,the last one I bought was a package deal,before that I built my own......I was a bit alarmed by the THG overhead experiment.I was originally looking at an AMD with a Palamino core,but I do like the Intel thermal protection feature..I probably wont exceed the 1.4,1.5 range if I even go that high......:) I kinda like the soyo motherboard featured in the mobo test...:) BTW,I just recently discovered this place...I love it...Thanks again...:) 

If ya don't ask..How ya gonna know.
December 16, 2001 7:29:55 PM

Thermal protection isn't an issue for the average user. It's not like the heatsink will suddenly fall off the CPU. AMD warns you not to install their processor without properly installing the HSF and if you don't listen to them then it's your fault. Microprocessors, whether it be Intel or AMD, are fragile. If you look at a processor, you will notice that they are extremely small and delicate. You could just as easily break a pin on a P4 as you could burn up an Athlon. As long as you are careful, you will have no problems.

AMD technology + Intel technology = Intel/AMD Pentathlon IV; the <b>ULTIMATE</b> PC processor
December 16, 2001 10:05:35 PM

I disagree on your "slightly better" statement of getting an AXP 1600 over a P4 1.5. There is huge different between both. Anandtech proves it very well.

IMO if you want Duron, get the 1.2GHZ. Worth it, sometimes better than
P4. Also it is so low cost too, and its socket allows you to expand in the future for other Athlons! Most likely a P3 Tualatin will be dead-end (seems like it), and a P4, well a P4 is bad bad bad.

Duron or AthlonXP=Happy buyer!

--
The other day I heard an explosion from the other side of town.... It was a 486 booting up...
December 16, 2001 10:12:49 PM

Well, that's not really a huge difference. I've once read in PC World that the average user won't notice a difference in performance between two computers unless one is at least 1.5x faster than the other.

AMD technology + Intel technology = Intel/AMD Pentathlon IV; the <b>ULTIMATE</b> PC processor
December 17, 2001 6:57:08 AM

He will notice the difference between a 1.5ghz p4 and an athlon 1600xp when he played ut let me tell you lol.

"The Cash Left In My Pocket,The BEST Benchmark"
No Overclock+stock hsf=GOOD!
!