celeron vs. AMD

celeron vs. AMD

Post by Scott Myro » Wed, 21 Apr 1999 04:00:00



Hello. I'm am going to build a new computer within the next few months,
and i would like to get the most for my money(who wouldn't?). Right now
i'm on a celeron 333. and it's great. I can make world in 2 hours flat.
That is a lot bette than my p133 that took 6 hrs.. Now, If i build
another computer at the moment, i'd either buy the celeron 433, or the
AMD K6-2 450. Which do you guys think would preform better? Btw, i'm not
building this for any type of server, just for normal every day, get on
the internet, do a bit of programing type of machine, Thanks..

Scott

 
 
 

celeron vs. AMD

Post by jame » Wed, 21 Apr 1999 04:00:00


i would easily say the amd! except maybe, if you plan on doing a lot *.
but for the most part the amd's blow the celerons out of the water.
especially when you consider the higher mhz you can afford for the same as
the lower mhz celeron.....
just my $.02.....

james


Quote:> Hello. I'm am going to build a new computer within the next few months,
> and i would like to get the most for my money(who wouldn't?). Right now
> i'm on a celeron 333. and it's great. I can make world in 2 hours flat.
> That is a lot bette than my p133 that took 6 hrs.. Now, If i build
> another computer at the moment, i'd either buy the celeron 433, or the
> AMD K6-2 450. Which do you guys think would preform better? Btw, i'm not
> building this for any type of server, just for normal every day, get on
> the internet, do a bit of programing type of machine, Thanks..

> Scott


 
 
 

celeron vs. AMD

Post by Mikhail Kru » Thu, 22 Apr 1999 04:00:00


if you want to buy this new machine to replace the celeron 333 you
should probably consider not buying it...
Celeron-333 should be quiet enough for internet browsing and a
bit of programming too. If you want to spend some money you can as well
add
some memory to it or buy good scsi drive.

> Hello. I'm am going to build a new computer within the next few months,
> and i would like to get the most for my money(who wouldn't?). Right now
> i'm on a celeron 333. and it's great. I can make world in 2 hours flat.
> That is a lot bette than my p133 that took 6 hrs.. Now, If i build
> another computer at the moment, i'd either buy the celeron 433, or the
> AMD K6-2 450. Which do you guys think would preform better? Btw, i'm not
> building this for any type of server, just for normal every day, get on
> the internet, do a bit of programing type of machine, Thanks..

> Scott

 
 
 

celeron vs. AMD

Post by Scott Myro » Thu, 22 Apr 1999 04:00:00


I don't want to replace the machine i have now. What i am now on,(the celeron
333) is the *family* computer. I wanted to build one for myself... so i wanted
yer advice on what was better to buy... celeron or AMD..

> if you want to buy this new machine to replace the celeron 333 you
> should probably consider not buying it...
> Celeron-333 should be quiet enough for internet browsing and a
> bit of programming too. If you want to spend some money you can as well
> add
> some memory to it or buy good scsi drive.


> > Hello. I'm am going to build a new computer within the next few months,
> > and i would like to get the most for my money(who wouldn't?). Right now
> > i'm on a celeron 333. and it's great. I can make world in 2 hours flat.
> > That is a lot bette than my p133 that took 6 hrs.. Now, If i build
> > another computer at the moment, i'd either buy the celeron 433, or the
> > AMD K6-2 450. Which do you guys think would preform better? Btw, i'm not
> > building this for any type of server, just for normal every day, get on
> > the internet, do a bit of programing type of machine, Thanks..

> > Scott

 
 
 

celeron vs. AMD

Post by Ted Sikor » Thu, 22 Apr 1999 04:00:00



> I don't want to replace the machine i have now. What i am now on,(the celeron
> 333) is the *family* computer. I wanted to build one for myself... so i wanted
> yer advice on what was better to buy... celeron or AMD..


> > if you want to buy this new machine to replace the celeron 333 you
> > should probably consider not buying it...
> > Celeron-333 should be quiet enough for internet browsing and a
> > bit of programming too. If you want to spend some money you can as well
> > add
> > some memory to it or buy good scsi drive.


> > > Hello. I'm am going to build a new computer within the next few months,
> > > and i would like to get the most for my money(who wouldn't?). Right now
> > > i'm on a celeron 333. and it's great. I can make world in 2 hours flat.
> > > That is a lot bette than my p133 that took 6 hrs.. Now, If i build
> > > another computer at the moment, i'd either buy the celeron 433, or the
> > > AMD K6-2 450. Which do you guys think would preform better? Btw, i'm not
> > > building this for any type of server, just for normal every day, get on
> > > the internet, do a bit of programing type of machine, Thanks..

> > > Scott

At present the Celerons are the "Best Buy". They are cheaper than AMD
and
faster than the Pentium II by 8-10%. Go figure! The floating point is
the best (same as Pentium II) so * is superior and many Unix apps
use this feature. Pesonally I have Cyrix MII's at the moment but when I
am able a 2x4** Celeron machine is what I am after. If you get a good
motherboard like a Soyo SY-6BE+ that accepts Pentium II and Celerons
up to say 660MHZ you are covered for future upgrades for a while. AMD
just came out with a 475Mhz which beats the Pentium II (450) but like
Cyrix it
is far short on the floating point. So if 3D and graphics are a
consideration go Intel. The final word. AMD and Cyrix are still low cost
alternatives *not* high-performance alternatives. This is changing
however. The Celeron 333 can be overclocked to 400 and 433 with no
trouble. This is a common practice and the reason Celerons beat the II's
is because the 128k cache runs at clock speed not bus speed so the cache
is instantly accessable to the processor.

--
Ted Sikora

http://www.veryComputer.com/

 
 
 

celeron vs. AMD

Post by Chris Leah » Thu, 22 Apr 1999 04:00:00



> I don't want to replace the machine i have now. What i am now on,(the celeron
> 333) is the *family* computer. I wanted to build one for myself... so i wanted
> yer advice on what was better to buy... celeron or AMD..


> > if you want to buy this new machine to replace the celeron 333 you
> > should probably consider not buying it...
> > Celeron-333 should be quiet enough for internet browsing and a
> > bit of programming too. If you want to spend some money you can as well
> > add
> > some memory to it or buy good scsi drive.


> > > Hello. I'm am going to build a new computer within the next few months,
> > > and i would like to get the most for my money(who wouldn't?). Right now
> > > i'm on a celeron 333. and it's great. I can make world in 2 hours flat.
> > > That is a lot bette than my p133 that took 6 hrs.. Now, If i build
> > > another computer at the moment, i'd either buy the celeron 433, or the
> > > AMD K6-2 450. Which do you guys think would preform better? Btw, i'm not
> > > building this for any type of server, just for normal every day, get on
> > > the internet, do a bit of programing type of machine, Thanks..

> > > Scott

I advise to use the AMD. The AMD has a 64k L1 cache that runs at the full
processor speed.
This is not the case with the Celeron.
So even at the same MHz speed, the AMD gets fed data much faster than the Intel
Celeron.
The Celeron might have the same clock speed but it gets fed data at a much slower
rate.
The end result is better performance at the same clock speed for the AMD.
The lower price doesnt hurt either and you can roll your saving into more memory
or better disk.
Dont spend your money on a name, spend it on performance.

The AMD will significantly outperform the Celeron.

--
The Analytical Engine has no pretensions whatever to originate anything.
It can do whatever we know how to order it to perform. Its province is
to assist us in making available what we are already aquainted with.
 -Ada Augusta mid 1800's

 
 
 

celeron vs. AMD

Post by Jos Visse » Thu, 22 Apr 1999 04:00:00



Quote:>i'm on a celeron 333. and it's great. I can make world in 2 hours flat.

I have a K6-2/400 and a build world on it takes 90 minutes.
I have no comparison with celerons however, but I have noticed that
disk i/o may be a bottleneck when building world on a fast machine.

Quote:>That is a lot bette than my p133 that took 6 hrs.. Now, If i build

my 486/133 (also AMD) takes 10 hours.

Jos

 
 
 

celeron vs. AMD

Post by david parso » Thu, 22 Apr 1999 04:00:00




Quote:>I don't want to replace the machine i have now. What i am now on,(the celeron
>333) is the *family* computer. I wanted to build one for myself... so i wanted
>yer advice on what was better to buy... celeron or AMD..

   As much as it pains me to say it...  Get a celeron with a cache.
   For doing real-world work (on Linux, alas, I don't have enough spare
   hardware to do side-by-side comparisons between K6s, Celerons, and
   80523s) I've found that a Celeron is slightly faster than an AMD K6
   doing kernel compiles (integer-only), and quite a bit faster running
   Schrodinger, Inc's _Jaguar_ program (floating-point).  It doesn't
   hurt that they're laughably cheap, either.

                 ____
   david parsons \bi/ Perhaps the K6-3 will be faster, but it's a lot more
                  \/                                         expensive :-(

 
 
 

celeron vs. AMD

Post by UMENO Takas » Fri, 23 Apr 1999 04:00:00




>> >i'm on a celeron 333. and it's great. I can make world in 2 hours flat.

>> I have a K6-2/400 and a build world on it takes 90 minutes.

I can make world in 55 minutes using dual celeron 300A (use 463MHz)
on FreeBSD-3.1-RELEASE with SMP kernel.

Quote:>> I have no comparison with celerons however, but I have noticed that
>> disk i/o may be a bottleneck when building world on a fast machine.

I think so.

T.Umeno

 
 
 

celeron vs. AMD

Post by UMENO Takas » Fri, 23 Apr 1999 04:00:00



>> I can make world in 55 minutes using dual celeron 300A (use 463MHz)
>> on FreeBSD-3.1-RELEASE with SMP kernel.

correct:
I can make -j 4 buildworld in 55 minutes using dual celeron 300A (use 463MHz)
on FreeBSD-3.1-STABLE (end of march) with SMP kernel.

T.Umeno

 
 
 

celeron vs. AMD

Post by Jason O'Rour » Fri, 23 Apr 1999 04:00:00



Quote:>I advise to use the AMD. The AMD has a 64k L1 cache that runs at the full
>processor speed.
>This is not the case with the Celeron.

It's not; the celeron has a 128k L1 that runs at the full processor speed.
That's why the celeron outperforms the PII (512k L1 at half cpu speed) in
certain benchmarks, and is probably better than the II for gamers.  

You can also overclock (esp the 300a) with good success, which is probably
not an option on the AMD.
--

'96 BMW r850R    

 
 
 

1. Celeron vs AMD K6

Hi.
Does anybody has celeron processor running linux?
I am thinking about putting together second pc and my choices are
celeron and AMD.
I know that AMD K6-2 is a good performer what about celeron? Is it worth
looking at?
I am planing to run Linux and Win NT so I am interested in 32 bit
performance. I am not a quake player so 3D performance isn't my first
priority. If I want to play quake I will get Voodo card. I am interested
in compilation speed of AMD K6 vs Celeron. And also general performance
under linux.
Thanks.
Alex

  vcard.vcf
< 1K Download

2. broken AT command - Slackware

3. Celeron vs AMD k6-2

4. in2000, what kernel, config used?

5. AMD K62, Celeron, compatibliltiy and Celeron Overclocking

6. Which GUI is more stable and mature: KDE or GNOME?

7. AMD K6-2 300 vs Celeron 300a?????

8. How to acces ext2 filesystem from DOS

9. Celeron A366 vs. AMD K6-2 400

10. AMD K6-3 vs. Dual Celerons

11. celeron 300a vs 333, 366, 400... celerons

12. Celeron vs. Celeron A

13. Dual celeron vs single celeron performance