Printable View
So, It's been a while since any talk of the low end CPU market has come up. How are the new P4 based celerons and how do they match up to the Durons of today?? I'm just sort of curious cause I remember "back in the day," not too far back, you would need like 200mhz more clock speed for a celeron to match speeds with a P3.
I am one of the biggest Intel fan boys out there, but I will be the first to tell you not to get a Celeron. The AMD chips kill them in the value market. You can get an XP 2500 for $75 and you will have a kick*ss system. If you waste the money on a 2.4 Celeron you with have a system that probably couldn't beat an XP 1700.
Agreed. Celerons are very weak chips and are not recommended by anyone. They have 400mhz fsb like the very early p4 and only 128kb of cache memory.They are smashed by equal valued athlons like ranger2992 saidQuote:
Originally posted by ranger2992
I am one of the biggest Intel fan boys out there, but I will be the first to tell you not to get a Celeron. The AMD chips kill them in the value market. You can get an XP 2500 for $75 and you will have a kick*ss system. If you waste the money on a 2.4 Celeron you with have a system that probably couldn't beat an XP 1700.
I am an Intel fan but not Celerons. Their performance is just too bad. Even if you could overclock that Celeron quite high a P4 1.8 would be able to beat it. The advise here is good......for value in the low end you just cannot beat AMD. That XP 2.5 for that price is just unbeatable. It is your best bet.
ALL ABOVE TRUE!!! BUT if you want BRAGGING rights the cellery 2.0, 2.2 and 2.4 will hit 3+ ghz with a good o/cing!!!
Screw bragging rights I just want a nice rig :D .Quote:
Originally posted by rusty c
ALL ABOVE TRUE!!! BUT if you want BRAGGING rights the cellery 2.0, 2.2 and 2.4 will hit 3+ ghz with a good o/cing!!!