Celeron 800 vs. Duron 800

[MrBaseball]

Which is a better processor? for gaming? for multi-tasking? reliability? I'm guessing the Duron is better but what do I know?

[vintron]

Duron is better

a Duron 800 can VERY easily beat even a PIII 950

[NDD]

Not a PIII 950 MHz, but Duron 800 MHz easily wastes any Celeron or PIII at the same+ clock speed. You can compare it to PIII 866 MHz.

Best Regards ...

[1Old Fart]

I have a Duron 800@880 and a Celeron 566@850 and see very little difference between them. People keep slamming Celerons and saying the Durons are so great but in real world use by me I see very little or no difference and find the Celeron a bit more stable. Sure the Duron bests the Celeron at 3d marks 2000 by a bit but they are both great at playing the latest games etc.
The main reason you may want to go with a Duron is the mobo should allow you to slip in a 1.4 T-bird when they get cheaper http://www.sysopt.com/forum/smile.gif
My 3cents worth http://www.sysopt.com/forum/wink.gif

[NDC]

I'd have to agree with 1Old **** on this one... I notice very little difference between Duron and Celeron in the real world. I get the feeling that it has to do with the fact that people know Celeron system bus is 66Mhz Vs. Duron's 200Mhz system bus and perhaps gives them the feeling it's much faster?

The becnhmarks don't really make much difference either....


* Duron 700 @ 990Mhz = ALU 2770 / FPU 1355

* Celeron 700 @ 945Mhz = ALU 2569 / FPU 1280

BTW - I have a Celeron and Duron based system as well...

[eagle1]

Hey Mr. Baseball, check this comparison and review of the Celeron 800 in here:


http://www.sharkyextreme.com/hardware/reviews/cpu/celeron_800/



[This message has been edited by eagle1 (edited 06-16-2001).]

[MrBaseball]

Thanks eagle1, I'll check that out.

[AuraEdge]

Your not noticing much difference because your running the Celeron at 100Mhz FSB. At 66Mhz FSB, which all celerons except the 850 run at, the duron will readily beat it.

A Duron 750 feels much smoother to me than a Celeron 850, but thats all in the feel to me.

Durons got - More Cache, FSB 2-3x greater, and is cheaper, and can usually OC a little higher.

[Dputiger]

Actually, there is an 800 Mhz version of the Celeron that also runs on a 100 Mhz bus.

That said, the Duron smokes the Celly in a variety of real-world tests, including video editing, MP3 encoding, MPeg4 decoding, SpecPERF, and all games.

In fact, I've seen even a Duron 600 win against a Celeron 800 (on its 100 Mhz bus).

[Andy_L]

I think the answer is simple, if you have a slot one or socket 370 motherboard that supports it, get a celeron, otherwise its much cheaper to build a Duron system, which will perform slightly better.

[NDD]

Tonz of syntetic tests like Sisoft Sandra and 3DMark can be run, and show that there's little difference between Celeron and Duron on same clock speeds, but when I saw Duron 750 MHz with only 64MB RAM completes installing Windows XP almost 2 times faster then PIII 800 with 128MB RAM (other hardware is the same), it was all clear to me http://www.sysopt.com/forum/smile.gif

Best Regards ...

[Dputiger]

Under Synthetic benchmarks, the performance difference between a K6-2 550 and a PIII 550 was neglible. In Quake II, it was another story.

Fact is, the Duron slaughters the Celeron in every single way. The Celly can't keep up in FPU strength, Mhz speed, bus speed, or anything else. From cache associativity to its ability to run at a 266 Mhz bus, the Duron simply smokes the Celly--generally, Duron's are even CHEAPER then Celly's, making them the leader in both price and performance.

Now I agree--if you already own a Socket370 board, it's probably a better investment to pick up a good Celly. (definitely cheaper).

But man, if you're building, don't even think about it. Hit any real-world benchmark you like--when it comes down to Celly vs. Duron, Celly loses every time.