Are Durons any good?

[marcusbateman]

Are Durons any good? How do they measure up against P3's and Athlons?

Cheers.

[otheos]

90-95% of the Athlon at same speed.
Best buy.

As for the P3, my D650@945 is about 5-10% faster than the p3 933. Especially on FPU (remenber the athlon/duron is 33% faster in FPU than the P3 @ same speed).

[werd]

with the DDR buss that they offer it realy helps alot in performance. and the higher you can get the front side buss the better the performance.

[Jerry]

While I understand Sandra has it's problems with reporting some stuff, when I ran it on the celeron 633 system I recently put together for my Dad, I was surprised to see it was faster than the Athlon 600 system they use as a benchmark.

Do you think this is right? It was Sandra 2000 Professional.

celeron 633
gigabyte vx7-4x

I didn't have a chance to do anything other than run sandra on it, but will carry out some major 'testing' when I go home next weekend.

[This message has been edited by Jerry (edited 09-21-2000).]

[Win_98]

Funny at AMD site, they claim that their K7 chip is 25 percent faster then celeron and 20 percent faster then PIII.

[otheos]

I doubt any celeron at stock speed is fanster than any athlon. The major reason is the 66MHz FSB and poor memory performance.
If you do a clock to clock integer bench with data accessed on the L2 only then yes the higher Mhz CPU wins. But then again Sandra said the K6-2 450 was faster than the P3-450. Go figure!

I insist that synthetic benchmarks are just synthetic and do not resemble real world situations (I think sandra says that in the tips).

If your system shows faster in Sandra than mine the only think that is certain is that your system runs Sandra faster than mine. Nothing more.

I think synthetic benchmarks are good enough to give you an idea of how your system ranks, and more importantly to allow you to compare different setups of your system.

[Jerry]

Well then I must have a very special copy of Sandra, because it does in fact benchmark, a non overclocked celeron2 633 faster than the Athlon 600 system it uses.

Results were as follows

celeron2 633

6981 MIPS
851FLOPS

Athlon 600

1676 MIPS
833 MFLOPS

BTW, for some reason Sandra also states that I'm running a multiplier of 5.5 and a 115 bus, weird huh.

[Win_98]

Jerry, the celeron II at 633mhz overclocked to 950mhz will be much faster then a duron at 600mhz. Most people will overclock their celeron, so a 100mhz FBS is not impossible and it does make it fly. But then again the benchmark maybe wrong, sure seem faster but can it actually perform in real life application?!