Older chip shoot-out:AMD K2 500MHz vs Intel Celeron 667 MHz processor(Socket 370)

[TBerk]

They are in comparable HP Pavillion computers, and while the Intel has
an edge with clock speed I think the AMD is beating it in real life
responsivness. Am I right?

(Besides the AMD based motherboard has three memory sockets vs two for
the 'Celery'.)


TBerk

 

[Nate Edel]

They are in comparable HP Pavillion computers, and while the Intel has
an edge with clock speed I think the AMD is beating it in real life
responsivness. Am I right?

(Besides the AMD based motherboard has three memory sockets vs two for
the 'Celery'.)

Actually, the Celerons of the P2/P3 generation - like the 667mhz one - were
pretty good. There is no AMD K2 that I'm aware of - I assume that means K6-2
(although there were, I think, some AMD Athlon [K7] 500mhz chips as well.)

The K6-2 was a pretty good chip but really more of a Pentium-MMX generation
chip than a P2/P3 generation chip. My bet would be on the Celeron.

Now, if by some chance that is a K7/Athlon 500mhz, that probably is at least
as fast as the Celeron.

 

[TBerk]

They are in comparable HP Pavillion computers, and while the Intel has
an edge with clock speed I think the AMD is beating it in real life
responsivness. Am I right?

(Besides the AMD based motherboard has three memory sockets vs two for
the 'Celery'.)

Actually, the Celerons of the P2/P3 generation - like the 667mhz one - were
pretty good. There is no AMD K2 that I'm aware of - I assume that means K6-2
(although there were, I think, some AMD Athlon [K7] 500mhz chips as well.)

The K6-2 was a pretty good chip but really more of a Pentium-MMX generation
chip than a P2/P3 generation chip. My bet would be on the Celeron.

Now, if by some chance that is a K7/Athlon 500mhz, that probably is at least
as fast as the Celeron.

--
Nate Edel http://www.cubiclehermit.com/
preferred email |
is "nate" at the | "I do have a cause, though. It is obscenity.
posting domain | I'm for it." - prologue to "Smut" by Tom Lehrer

Alright, Thanks. And you are right, I forgot the '6' there.

What I found out since then is less the chips and speed and more the
OS; I put Win2k on the AMD system (w/ 256M RAM) and it sat up and
barked right past the others, running WinXP.


Thx for the reply,
TBerk

 

[Nate Edel]

Actually, the Celerons of the P2/P3 generation - like the 667mhz one - were
pretty good. There is no AMD K2 that I'm aware of - I assume that means K6-2
(although there were, I think, some AMD Athlon [K7] 500mhz chips as well.)

The K6-2 was a pretty good chip but really more of a Pentium-MMX generation
chip than a P2/P3 generation chip. My bet would be on the Celeron.

Alright, Thanks. And you are right, I forgot the '6' there.

What I found out since then is less the chips and speed and more the
OS; I put Win2k on the AMD system (w/ 256M RAM) and it sat up and
barked right past the others, running WinXP.

XP on 256mb of RAM was a bad idea when it shipped, and it's gotten to be a
totally untenable one with various patches (and especially with IE 7 -
overall, it's better than 6 and IME a little faster if you've got enough
ram, but it's definitely more memory-hungry.)