i have others cpu but very old so...

Now i wonder what is the best processor between these two?
One is 1ghz and the other is 850hz, that's all i understand.
From what i remember the 850hz one is newer than the 1ghz... but he's slower, so i'm kind of lost.

Maybe some of you understand these strange numbers and could indicate me which one is the best? i hope xD

Boblion

France8043 Posts

March 04 2010 00:51 GMT

The athlon has more L2 cache

I think i would give him an edge but i guess it is probably close.

Cambium

United States16368 Posts

March 04 2010 00:53 GMT

On March 04 2010 09:51 Boblion wrote:
The athlon has more L2 cache

I think i would give him an edge.

Deleted User 47542

1484 Posts

March 04 2010 00:54 GMT

Athlon is a newer chip, but oh my god how do you expect your computer to run anything? An athlonx2 240 is like 50 bucks and will perform 10 times better than those two chips. I hope your just building for experience rather than trying to do anything other than playing mine sweeper.

blabber

United States4448 Posts

March 04 2010 00:55 GMT

another vote for the Athlon

On March 04 2010 09:54 superbabosheki wrote:
Athlon is a newer chip, but oh my god how do you expect your computer to run anything? An athlonx2 240 is like 50 bucks and will perform 10 times better than those two chips. I hope your just building for experience rather than trying to do anything other than playing mine sweeper.

maybe he wants another computer to play Brood War on?

Boblion

France8043 Posts

March 04 2010 01:00 GMT

Hey look what i have found for you:
Your Duron is the 1Ghz Morgan in the chart, and your Athlon is like the 1Ghz Tbird but clocked a bit lower.

The Spitfire is another kind of Athlon core and the Palomino another kind of Duron core.

For FlashMPEG and Maya the lower = the better.

gds

Iceland1391 Posts

March 04 2010 01:03 GMT

Yes i'm building the PC only for starcraft & CS1.6 because i dont like playing on my laptop (i only play these two games anyway).

So i go for the athlon even if he's slower?

edit: nice find boblion , go athlon, thank you all

FragKrag

United States11565 Posts

March 04 2010 01:04 GMT

The Duron was the predecessor of the Sempron and both are considered low budget chips. Go with the Athlon.

Boblion

France8043 Posts

March 04 2010 01:06 GMT

On March 04 2010 10:03 gds wrote:
Yes i'm building the PC only for starcraft & CS1.6 because i dont like playing on my laptop (i only play these two games anyway).

So i go for the athlon even if he's slower?

edit: nice find boblion , go athlon, thank you all

Well after paying a closer look to the charts i think that the Duron 1Ghz might actually be ahead because it is really close to the Tbird 1Ghz even in games

It seems that L2 didn't matter as much than with nowadays programs :p

btw: your Morgan is the Morgan(100), 100 being the bus speed

Anyway i think it is really close so it shouldn't really matter.

jimminy_kriket

Canada5532 Posts

March 04 2010 01:29 GMT

#10

overclock the athlon!

Actually, for fun you should try and overclock the duron realllly high up, like try and push it to 1.5ghz then go higher if you can (it might explode though

)

Inschato

Canada1349 Posts

March 04 2010 01:38 GMT

#11

And possibly damage the mobo in the process, bad idea =P

gds

Iceland1391 Posts

March 04 2010 01:44 GMT

#12

oh look what i found in my cellar

AMD 233mhz xD so cute

gds

Iceland1391 Posts

March 04 2010 01:45 GMT

#13

On March 04 2010 10:29 jimminy_kriket wrote:
overclock the athlon!

Actually, for fun you should try and overclock the duron realllly high up, like try and push it to 1.5ghz then go higher if you can (it might explode though

)

lol no way

JSH

United States4109 Posts

March 04 2010 01:45 GMT

#14

Title is kind of misleading

Best Processor? and you list two really old ones

Inschato

Canada1349 Posts

March 04 2010 02:06 GMT

#15

http://www.ncix.com/products/productdetail2.php?noheader=1&sku=34600

/tongueincheek

FragKrag

United States11565 Posts

March 04 2010 02:14 GMT

#16

On March 04 2010 10:44 gds wrote:
oh look what i found in my cellar

AMD 233mhz xD so cute

amazing stuff :D

cgrinker

United States3824 Posts

March 04 2010 03:16 GMT

#17

Depends on how much RAM you have. If your system has more memory then you are going to have more pages in memory and you are going to swap out your cache more often.

See if you can clock the Athlon up

ShinyGerbil

Canada519 Posts

March 04 2010 03:21 GMT

#18

one thing to notice is that they have the same base speed, and the athlon is just clocked at a lower rate. If you could overclock it to 10x, it seems like it would obsolete the other processor (then again, if you have a 10 year old motherboard fan as well this might cause issues.)

Cambium

United States16368 Posts

March 04 2010 03:46 GMT

#19

On March 04 2010 10:06 Boblion wrote:

Show nested quote +

Well after paying a closer look to the charts i think that the Duron 1Ghz might actually be ahead because it is really close to the Tbird 1Ghz even in games

It seems that L2 didn't matter as much than with nowadays programs :p

btw: your Morgan is the Morgan(100), 100 being the bus speed

Anyway i think it is really close so it shouldn't really matter.

I'm actually curious. Why does L2 cache not matter to "nowadays programs"?

ghermination

United States2851 Posts

March 04 2010 03:48 GMT

#20

I've got a 1ghz Pentium 3 with expansion board, as well as a 2.66ghz Celeron D (that i never even owned, i don't even remember where i got it). It's pretty sad how close the performance of these two chips are. (Obviously the Celeron whipes the floor with the coppermine but only by so much, mostly of it's dual cores. God netburst sucked soooo bad.)