Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

AMD Compared to Celeron

Last response: in CPUs
Share
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
March 15, 2002 11:00:56 PM

Could some one tell me which CPU is better and why, the AMD Athlon or the 1.3G Celeron?

More about : amd compared celeron

March 15, 2002 11:04:53 PM

Which Athlon? What applications?

<font color=orange>Quarter</font color=orange> <font color=blue>Pounder</font color=blue> <font color=orange>Inside</font color=orange>
Don't step in the sarcasm!
March 15, 2002 11:26:18 PM

?????????

huh. this is NOT a well thought out post.

AMD = company
Celleron = type of intel cpu.

so you want to compare the celleron 1.3Ghz.
against what?
AMD duron 1.3?
AMD athlon B @ 1.3?
AMD athlon C @ 1.333?
AMD XP1500+ (@ 1.333 also)

well then,

the XP1500+ will SMOKE the celleron 1.3, having larger cache, more efficient chip design, higher ram/system bus speeds, and DDR ram.

The athlon C & B will be better for 99% of things, as they too have more onchip cache, better design, DDR ram support etc.

The Duron 1.3... well find out for yourself. toms hardware did a comparison between the duron 1.3 and the celleron 1.3. the duron wins the majority of things, due to ddr ram support and other factors, but the celleron has more onboard cache, so it wins a few things instead.

personally i would save my money and get an XP1500+, not a duron.


I love helping people in Toms Forums... It reinforces my intellectual superiority! :smile:
Related resources
March 15, 2002 11:48:35 PM

An Athlon running at the same 1.3 speed would be faster in every app. You can get much faster Athlons though then 1.3 so the difference is even greater....

Jesus saves, but Mario scores!!!
March 16, 2002 2:04:38 AM

The 1.3 celeron is the new .13 micron Tualatin version of the chip and is basically a full up Pentium III with 256k cache. The only problem is Intel limits it to 100 MHz. front side bus speed. That is the killer that sets it behind the AMD chips which all have their double pumped FSB, either 200 MHz. or 266 MHz.

These new Celerons will run somewhat closer to their Duron competition than the old Coppermine Celerons, but I suspect they will still be beaten by a Duron of similar clock speed. They will certainly be beat hands down by the Athlon versions.

Scout
a b à CPUs
March 16, 2002 4:31:44 AM

Almost any 133MHz FSB Athlon (AMD calls it 266) will beat it hands down. I had a Celeron Tualatin 1.2GHz, which was slightly beaten by my PIII 933, and beaten a little more by my PIII 1000EB.

What's the frequency, Kenneth?
March 16, 2002 4:35:11 AM

AMD compared to Celeron? I guess its the Duron that should be really compared to Celeron!

Anyway, newer Coppermines with 100 MHz FSB and Tualatin Celerons with 256 L2 cache perfrom a lot better than earlier ones, enough to compete with P-IIIs and even P4s! As for the cost, the 1A Celeron should be better than the Athlon which costs a bit more, but all athlons at 1.3 GHz have 133 MHz FSB that beats Celeron anytime!

It finally boils down your preference, AMD or Intel, just keep in mind the Intel socket370 platform is near its end, while the AMD socketA has a lot longer to go!

I guess you'd be much better buying a Duron and invest the money saved in a decent motherboard.

girish

<font color=red>Nothing is fool-proof. Fools are Ingenious!</font color=red>
March 16, 2002 10:46:08 AM

Quote:
Anyway, newer Coppermines with 100 MHz FSB and Tualatin Celerons with 256 L2 cache perfrom a lot better than earlier ones, enough to compete with P-IIIs and even P4s! As for the cost, the 1A Celeron should be better than the Athlon which costs a bit more, but all athlons at 1.3 GHz have 133 MHz FSB that beats Celeron anytime!


The tbird performs about the same clock per clock as the new duron.

The duron can beat a celley more than 100mhz faster than it.

Therefore the 1ghz tbird will out perfom a 1ghz celly.

"The Cash Left In My Pocket,The BEST Benchmark"
No Overclock+stock hsf=GOOD!
March 16, 2002 3:22:46 PM

exactly, I know.

but with <font color=green>As for the cost, the 1A Celeron should be better than the Athlon which costs a bit more</font color=green>, I meant from the cost perspective, the celeron looks a lot attractive than the Athlon. Duron is of course, cheaper and better than the Celeron. I did say then <font color=green>but all athlons at 1.3 GHz have 133 MHz FSB that beats Celeron anytime</font color=green>!

girish

<font color=red>Nothing is fool-proof. Fools are Ingenious!</font color=red>
March 16, 2002 3:44:33 PM

To be honest, Celerons 1.3GHZ cost much more than Athlons 1.3GHZ. Here in Canada they are 190$, and 1.3GHZ is long gone but it was much below. The Duron 1.3 is around 140$.

--
For the first time, Hookers are hooked on Phonics!!
March 16, 2002 6:04:48 PM

Quote:
but with As for the cost, the 1A Celeron should be better than the Athlon which costs a bit more, I meant from the cost perspective, the celeron looks a lot attractive than the Athlon. Duron is of course, cheaper and better than the Celeron. I did say then but all athlons at 1.3 GHz have 133 MHz FSB that beats Celeron anytime!


On pricewatch you can get a 1ghz tbird for 72 bucks, whereas the 1ghz celly is 61 bucks, the athlon will signifigantly out perform it, I think the athlon is a better deal.

A 900mhz athlon tbird would out perform the celly, and costs less if that helps in absolute price/performance.

"The Cash Left In My Pocket,The BEST Benchmark"
No Overclock+stock hsf=GOOD!
March 16, 2002 6:05:39 PM

On pricewatch the 1.33ghz tbird is 80$.

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