CPU's

Lee H

I have 2 questions i hope someone can answer


Q1, Semperon 2300 is 1.58Ghz, Celeron D320 is 2.4Ghz, which is the faster of the two?

Q2, I have a sony laptop, if i right click my computer and select properties i get 3.2Ghz as the procesor speed but also i have 1.6Ghz next to it, what does the second one mean?


Lee H

princess4peace

Q1, Semperon 2300 is 1.58Ghz, Celeron D320 is 2.4Ghz, which is the faster of the two?

Celeron D320 is faster since it has a higher processor's speed.

Q2, I have a sony laptop, if i right click my computer and select properties i get 3.2Ghz as the procesor speed but also i have 1.6Ghz next to it, what does the second one mean?

is the laptop cpu having a hyper-threading functionalities?
http://www.intel.com/technology/hyperthread/

Ricka182

princess4peace wrote:

Celeron D320 is faster since it has a higher processor's speed.

Not always true. Would you say a P4 2.6Ghz is faster than an AMD 64 @ 2Ghz? No way..... The Sempron is basically AMDs newest answer to the Celeron. In your case, the Celeron may be faster, but the AMD speed is always clocked differently.

Lee H wrote:

Q2, I have a sony laptop, if i right click my computer and select properties i get 3.2Ghz as the procesor speed but also i have 1.6Ghz next to it, what does the second one mean?

Haven't seen that one before......

Lee H

Somebody has told me that the Celeron D is a cut down version of the proscott with only half the amount of onboard cache, is this relevant to overall speed?

The laptop is not got Hyper Threading, it says
Pentium(R) 4 CPU 3.06GHz
1.83 GHz, 512 MB of RAM

Its a sony Vaio Model PCG-K315S, its baffled me.

Ricka182

Lee H wrote:

Somebody has told me that the Celeron D is a cut down version of the proscott with only half the amount of onboard cache, is this relevant to overall speed?

The laptop is not got Hyper Threading, it says
Pentium(R) 4 CPU 3.06GHz
1.83 GHz, 512 MB of RAM

Its a sony Vaio Model PCG-K315S, its baffled me.

Wow someone did something to that laptop. The first measurement, 3.06Ghz is the advertised clock speed, the second measurement is the actual speed it's running at when you clicked, 1.89 Ghz. Check your Bios to see if it's setup correctly. You're being robbed of a good amount of speed. As far as on-board cache, it matters a lot, the more the better. I don't know about the prescott to celeron comparison, but it wouldn't surprise me.

skully93

I've recently had a chance to play with some Sempron and Celeron processors. I use an older Duron as my fileserver.

The AMD chips tend to be a bit more snappy and stable. There's nothing really wrong with a Celeron, esp. at high speeds, but it just lacks the overall 'torque' I like to see.

bighusker

It seems like Semprons are phasing out the Athlon XPs, and the Athlon XPs were considerably more powerful than their Celeron counterparts. Here's the specs on the Celeron CPU from newegg, which is $72:

Core Prescott
Name Celeron D 320
Operating Frequency 2.4GHz
FSB 533MHz
L1 Cache 12KB+16KB
L2 Cache 256KB

And the Sempron 2300:

Core Thoroughbred
Name Sempron 2300+
Operating Frequency 1.583GHz
FSB 333MHz
L1 Cache 64KB+64KB
L2 Cache 256KB

I think AMD does something weird with doubling their FSB, so the difference in FSB speed isn't going to be that noticable. It's probably about a draw, but I'll give the Sempron the nod since it's about $10 cheaper and has a bigger L1 cache.

qsub

Well.. Sempron is made to replace Athlon XP's and completely take out Duron processors.

How AMD works with their processor/naming. There 2500XP Barton Core's real speed is 1.87ghz. The 2500 name is there because it's considerd comparable to a p4 2.5ghz.

Semprons have higher FSB then Athlon XPs. A majority of them. Most of them don't go pass 333. Although a couple do. 3000XP-3200XP or somewhere along that. Semprons have 400 FSB and lower cache then normal Athlon processors.

As for the celeron D. It's just an upgrade of the origional celerons that came out during the P4 400/533/800fsb era. All that's changed in their processor is cache and fsb. Both have been increased.

Here's my input though since I've ran AMD/Intel systems before.
Semprons ment to outphase Duron processors and to take over Athlon XP processors.

Athlon XP Processors were always better then celeron processors.

Celerons got boosted a little bit.

But the celeron is still a celeron.

mikey_b

Yeah, the Sempron processors usually walk away from the Celerons of the same rating in most cases. I'm actually typing this on a Sempron 3200+ in my laptop, and this thing flies. My desktop is an Athlon 2400+ and my new laptop just walks away from it in terms of overall performance. It's excellent for general usage and I'm very happy with it, and it really smokes comparable Celeron-based laptops.

When you right click on My Computer and select Properties on a laptop, it will show you 2 clock speeds. Advertised and Current. For example, my Sempron runs at a maximum of 1.8Ghz and says it's a 3200+, but right now it is running at 986Mhz. That's awfully quick for running IE and Norton. If I decide to listen to some music and have a bunch of Word and Excel files open and am task switching a lot, it'll go up accordingly.

Plantwiz

You can look at the specs for each brand, but the only real way to test the two is side by side with similar software. Even then, there is no way to keep everything equal as each MOBO would be different.

Someone can say that their AMD is the best for 'x' game and a P4 user may say that their P4 is the best running solidworks, but in reality it may come down to the graphics card and/or ram.

Personally, I'm a little biased to AMD, but for the past few years my clients only request Intel...so that's what they get. I've seen limited differences between which is better, so it really comes down to what you can afford.

I try for as much onboard cache as possible and go from there.

qsub

Heh, the only difference is a hundred bucks in Canada