Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Hardware and Software => Topic started by: B17Skull12 on August 25, 2004, 07:11:20 PM
-
ok i need to get educated. Whats the difference?
-
http://www.tomshardware.com
http://www.anandtech.com
Start here to answer your question;
http://www6.tomshardware.com/cpu/20020903/
Hope this helps...
Thorns
-
..
-
Celerons suck! Take it from a guy who has a celeron. Dont buy one ever. You will regreat it for the rest of your life. Pentiums are way faster then crappy celerons.
-
P4 Prescot is
16k L1 cache
1024k L2 cache
P4 Northwood is
8k L1 cache
512kb L2 cache
Celeron Prescott
16k L1 cache
256k L2 cache
Celeron Northwood
8k L1 cache
128k L2 cache
Basicaly its the cache that KILLS celerons speed. Celerons also dont have HT (2 logical cpus) and i think most use 533fsb instead of 800 for the P4.
AMD Athlon 64 will beat them all though......
-
I have owned a PC since the early 90's. They have all been Intel chips. After reading this board and reviewing other sources, I believe my next PC will be AMD based. A lot of what I've read indicates that AMD has truly leaped ahead of Intel, particularly for gaming applications. Read up on it and I'm sure you'll find the same thing.
LOL...I'm listening Skuzzy! After asking about different component upgrades, I've resigned myself to a new system just for this *&^%()_{() game. Not that its a bad thing... :) This board is a great start to learn about components that will make AHII sing. Its a whole new language since my last PC purchase in 2001.
-
think of it this way:
Celeron= V4 engine 2L
Pentiums= V8 engines 4L
Both will reach 100mph but only one of them will get there faster and have more power.
And power is what you really want for games
-
Originally posted by OIO
think of it this way:
Celeron= V4 engine 2L
Pentiums= V8 engines 4L
Both will reach 100mph but only one of them will get there faster and have more power.
And power is what you really want for games
And the AMD socket 939 64 is the ferrari V-12:aok
-
Originally posted by humble
And the AMD socket 939 64 is the ferrari V-12:aok
nooooooo!
the v12 is the P4 prescott, sucks in the fuel as a massive rate, creates alot of heat, and high rpm, but not worth it for the power
the AMD 939 64 is a ferrari V10 type 53 ;)
lol
-
Prescott core derived Celerons are often noted as Celeron Ds. Overlag is correct in cache sizes and lack of Hyperthreading in the Celeron line. Celeron Ds use a 533 MHz FSB and the older Northwood derived Celerons are 400 MHz FSB parts. All of these cuts result in a severely crippled product.
I cannot recommend buying any Celeron based system. They perform poorly and are not priced well considering their performance versus their AMD counterparts or even compared with their Pentium 4 relatives after Intel's recent price cuts.
-
I'm too old I guess. I remember the days when Celereys were considered the hot gaming choice. You could overclock the heck out of them and smoke a PII or PIII. Celerons offered tremendous price value + performance. And the AMD K-6-2 was such a poor performer because of it's lack of floating point ability, it wasn't even mentioned. I did use the k-6-2- 400 in my business machine , where it still sits today running SUSE Linux just fine.
-
Originally posted by MOSQ
I'm too old I guess. I remember the days when Celereys were considered the hot gaming choice. You could overclock the heck out of them and smoke a PII or PIII. Celerons offered tremendous price value + performance. And the AMD K-6-2 was such a poor performer because of it's lack of floating point ability, it wasn't even mentioned. I did use the k-6-2- 400 in my business machine , where it still sits today running SUSE Linux just fine.
yes but that was 6 years ago...things have changed :D
-
Wait till you see what happens in the next six years! :)
Thorns
-
Originally posted by Thorns
Wait till you see what happens in the next six years! :)
Thorns
i dont think much is going to happen
i mean the last 2 years have been rubbish in the cpu world.....:(
-
I need a new gaming system, (especially for OzKansas!!!!) but am waiting till January when we should see a decent selection of PCI Express mobos, PCI Express Vid cards, SATA HDs, DDR2 memory, and the new Intel Chipsets out. That will force AMD to have further price cuts on Athlon 64s, and should create some very good price/performance systems.
I never buy cutting edge stuff, and this is a good time to wait for the inevitable price reductions on all these new standards.
-
Originally posted by MOSQ
I need a new gaming system, (especially for OzKansas!!!!) but am waiting till January when we should see a decent selection of PCI Express mobos, PCI Express Vid cards, SATA HDs, DDR2 memory, and the new Intel Chipsets out. That will force AMD to have further price cuts on Athlon 64s, and should create some very good price/performance systems.
I never buy cutting edge stuff, and this is a good time to wait for the inevitable price reductions on all these new standards.
an a64 3000 is very cheap now.......
-
By the time middle of next year rolls round, AMD Athlon 64 "dual core" cpus will be available (2 cpus on one die). Now thats what I call a speed monster. Imagine the speed of 2 AMD 64 3500's in one processor.
-
Originally posted by Kev367th
By the time middle of next year rolls round, AMD Athlon 64 "dual core" cpus will be available (2 cpus on one die). Now thats what I call a speed monster. Imagine the speed of 2 AMD 64 3500's in one processor.
SMP isnt that great, everything will need to be reprogrammed for it.
id rather have 1 4500 than 2 3500s. but since both intel and amd cant up speeds much right now, they are taking the easy route.....
-
SMP and "Dual Core" are different. The current range of AMD 64s already have the capacity for "Dual Core" but they "extra" CPU isn't built into them. This is not hyperthreading as implemented in P4s.
In fact dual core will primarily use the hypertransport bus between cores, but will also support slower hyperthreading.
All you have to do is set processor affinity to take advantage of it, run your OS on one core, your game on the other core.
Agreed though largest speed increases will need apps that are aware.
Saying that the first desktop dual core cpus will be based on whatever AMD FX5? CPU is current. Even without being able to take full advantage there will still be a measurable speed increase.
There is absolutly positively no truth to the rumour that AMD processors are cheaper, faster and better than Intel. (http://www.cyberonic.net/~kreed/IraqiInf.jpg)