Is there really an advatage of Pentium over Celeron?

hearld500 · Post by **hearld500** » Tue Jun 03, 2003 12:25 am

I'm seriously thinking about building a new computer.
My question is, is there an actual advantage of the pentium line of CPUs of Celerons?
Also, how do AMD CPUs compare to either of the two?

If there is a advantage of Pentium, does it out weight the cost difference?

THX

beerbaron · Post by **beerbaron** » Tue Jun 03, 2003 12:50 am

check pricewatch.com for all your PC parts purchases. I would say yes there is a difference between the Pentiums and Celerons. Although it depends on what you want to use the computer for. If it's for games or divxs, definately go Pentium or AMD. If it's gonna be for just using MS Office and AIM then a celeron should do. I've found that the celerons really don't perform as well as Pentiums. AMDs seem to perform just as good as a Pentium. But a lot of it depends on your motherboard. Do not buy a cheap motherboard!!!

ninja · Post by **ninja** » Tue Jun 03, 2003 5:48 am

Well, in a quick comparison:

If you have 2 PC's, one running a 1.0 ghz Pentium Processor VS the exact same PC running a 1.0 ghz celeron, the pentium will flat out smoke it in all aspects.

Now, if you had an Athlon VS Pentium, its a hell of a lot closer

in the end, my opinion: DO NOT GET A CELERON!

Also, like i was posted above, the motherboard has a lot to do with it, as well as how much airflow you get going in your case.

Matt · Post by **Matt** » Tue Jun 03, 2003 2:09 pm

Why don't you get an Athlon instead of a Pentium and a Cerelron

btm4k · Post by **btm4k** » Tue Jun 03, 2003 4:42 pm

AMD doesn't compare with a Pentium. AMD (Advanced Mirco Devices) is a company. Pentium is a product (by Intel). AMD does have different classes of processors too though.

racketboy · Post by **racketboy** » Tue Jun 03, 2003 5:10 pm

It's the level 2 cache that makes the difference, correct?

racketboy · Post by **racketboy** » Tue Jun 03, 2003 5:12 pm

btm4k wrote:AMD doesn't compare with a Pentium. AMD (Advanced Mirco Devices) is a company. Pentium is a product (by Intel). AMD does have different classes of processors too though.

especially now if you get a new Canterwood set
3Ghz P4 w/ Hyperthreading running on a 800Mhz bus -- oh yeah!

I hope to get one this summer and have Photoshop fly

sixteen-bit · Post by **sixteen-bit** » Tue Jun 03, 2003 8:39 pm

racketboy wrote:
btm4k wrote:AMD doesn't compare with a Pentium. AMD (Advanced Mirco Devices) is a company. Pentium is a product (by Intel). AMD does have different classes of processors too though.
especially now if you get a new Canterwood set
3Ghz P4 w/ Hyperthreading running on a 800Mhz bus -- oh yeah!

I hope to get one this summer and have Photoshop fly

I used to buy the biggest baddest Intel CPU around until my slotted PIII-450 (first gen) overheated and died after 18 months using pretty decent cooling. Nowadays I could build a monitorless AMD system for the price of that P4 CPU

Yeah, so it won't be utterly kickass but it'd play Morrowind and GTA:VC fine.

hearld500 · Post by **hearld500** » Tue Jun 03, 2003 9:09 pm

Hmm, so whats the the say......2200+ on an AMD CPU would equal what in MHz?

I dont know much about the AMDs, so help me out.

sixteen-bit · Post by **sixteen-bit** » Tue Jun 03, 2003 9:31 pm

hearld500 wrote:Hmm, so whats the the say......2200+ on an AMD CPU would equal what in MHz?

I dont know much about the AMDs, so help me out.

The AthlonXP2100+ is 1667MHz so I guess the XP2200+ is around 1750?

hearld500 · Post by **hearld500** » Tue Jun 03, 2003 9:40 pm

So why would you buy an AMD when you could get a Pentium at 3Ghz instead of a top of the line AMD at 1750mhz?

racketboy · Post by **racketboy** » Tue Jun 03, 2003 9:58 pm

AMD might be a tad better for the money, but if you want the best performance you have to get a P4. Esp if you use stuff like Photoshop, Premeire, or Vegas Video that take advantage of it

hearld500 · Post by **hearld500** » Tue Jun 03, 2003 11:08 pm

For gaming then, whats the best?

racketboy · Post by **racketboy** » Wed Jun 04, 2003 12:23 am

what's your budget

hearld500 · Post by **hearld500** » Wed Jun 04, 2003 12:51 am

Well, I dont have one.
I just need a good idea of the draw backs and pluses of different CPUs.
I dont want to spend a ton, but I do want a good runner.
So, if the difference is that much, I'll go with the more expensive one and vice versa.

zickfun · Post by **zickfun** » Wed Jun 04, 2003 7:32 am

O.K..
Celeron sux compared to all because it has only 1/2 the level 2 cache of the P4. This makes a 3ghz Celeron ($150) slower then a AMD Athlon XP 1800+ ($125). Cache really matters a lot. The P4 runs on an ub3r sp33d front side bus at 533mhz or 800mhz compared to the 133/266 (XP 1500-XP 2400+), 333/400 (XP 2400-3000+). This gives it an overall speed head start. but if i were you cause I wanna play games get a 3000+XP as it is only roughly 10% slower then the 3ghz P4 and is only half the price. CELERON IS NOT AN OPTION!~!!!! NEVER EVER BUY A CELERON, I WOULD RATHER HAVE A AMD ATHLON XP 1600+ THEN A CELERON 3GHZ!!!! ALSO P4 IS ALWAYS CHANGING ITS DESIGN AND NEW SLOTS AND THE UPGRADE OPTIONS ARE ALWAYS CRAP!!! (eg. the first P4's died after 8 months of production when Intel decided to get a new socket for them

)

sixteen-bit · Post by **sixteen-bit** » Wed Jun 04, 2003 9:37 am

hearld500 wrote:So why would you buy an AMD when you could get a Pentium at 3Ghz instead of a top of the line AMD at 1750mhz?

Because the XP 2200 isn't top of the range; It costs ?54 and a 3GHz P4 costs ?330. AMD offer an XP3200 clocking in at the mid 2GHz range that can keep pace with the best Intel can offer.

someoneElse · Post by **someoneElse** » Wed Jun 04, 2003 5:04 pm

racketboy wrote: especially now if you get a new Canterwood set
3Ghz P4 w/ Hyperthreading running on a 800Mhz bus -- oh yeah!

I hope to get one this summer and have Photoshop fly

And that huge 800MHz bus speed is more like an AMD 200MHz bus speed, because they are using a much smaller bit word. So they do less work, but do it more often. Same reason that Intel intentionally lowered the IPC (Instructions Per Clock) on the P4s, so that they could then boost the clock cycle so that it would APPEAR to be rediculously faster than competing chips to consumers, when in fact it was simply doing less work per clock, but doing it more often. That's what led to AMD's new 'performance+' rating system for their chips, to even the field a little.

By the way, check out Barton Core Athlon XPs (Starting at 2500+). Higher FSB and Twice the cache...

racketboy · Post by **racketboy** » Wed Jun 04, 2003 5:34 pm

well as I mentioned, PS, Premier, and Vegas will be taking advantage of Hyperthreading (something Athlons don't have -- yet) which has already proven to make a significant difference.

However if you're just building a gaming machine, you best performance for the $ is probably an Athlon

IronChef510 · Post by **IronChef510** » Fri Jun 06, 2003 12:57 am

For gaming, go Athlon Xp, its cheaper and gets the job done, plus overclocking.

A good system would be
Epox 8RDA+ Mobo - 80 something dollars at newegg.com
Athlon XP 2200 - pricewatch.com
2 256 Crucial Ram - Cheap at newegg.com
Radeon 9700 Pro - 198 at http://www.fticomputer.com/cgis/detail. ... es=&cat=VB

and all the other stuff, cd drive, nac card, etc etc

That pc will play any game out right now fine. And its not too expensive

Is there really an advatage of Pentium over Celeron?

Is there really an advatage of Pentium over Celeron?

For Gaming