100MHz Celerons up to it with Durons and Morgans?

[Degenerate]

Do you think so? Given chip support.

By the way, what chipset does Amd plan to have for their value sector? I was reading the Sharkyextreme report and i think they metioned a 3rd party chipset. Why Amd wont make one for their speedy Durons? or are they?

Also, what does intel plan for their mobile chips? P3 will reach about 900 by 3Q 20001, i don't think the Athlons cand stand a chance.

 

[etech]

Go look at Anands reviews, the Durons are faster then the overclocked celerons already. Wait till the KT133A chipset comes out and there will be no contest.

There are two integrated chipsets out. The early performance does not seem that good, but for a very cheap computer it does not look that bad either. The people buying for websurfing and office apps look more at price then performance.

I havn't kept up with the mobile issues too much, but did you see the report of a 1.5Ghz Palomino running with only a heatsink and no fan. Looks like it might be the P3 and P4 that won't be able to keep up.

 

[Goi]

They'll be a vast improvement over the current Celerons, but still nowhere near the performance of Durons, much less the price/performance ratio. However, they will still have their market as Durons don't have as much exposure in the retail sector as Celerons.

 

[Remedy]

What a Joke, Intel were better off giving them the 133mhz instead. Either that or RDram support. In anands benchies even when it was @100mhz it was still far behind the durons so i don't get the reason for moving it there anyways. They might as well drop the celeron line and make P3 the bottom of the barrel and have the P4 as the flagship IMHO.

 

[Whitedog]

They've already benched Cely's running 100mhz and they still loose.

 

[Vegito]

Except the price factor, even at 100fsb, the price is still double a duron and even triple...

 

[DaddyG]

The SIS730 and the VIA KM133 are two of the integrated chipsets that will appear in value base Duron systems. Neither of them have performance as good as Intels 815E but with the extra power of Duron over Celery all should end up pretty equal.

 

[Rigoletto]

I never tire of quoting Tom's Hardware benchmarks (I need to get a life). I have seen Celeron@900 benching like an Athlon 600, or @950 like a PIII800E. So basically, nope, Celerons are still only good if you have an Intel board.
I believe AMD concentrates mainly on K6-2 mobile lower end chips with power saving technology. This is a shame as mobile and server markets give such high returns. AMD disappoints the shareholder whilst Intel disappoints the poweruser, you could say. Unfortunately, Intel guarantees shareholders a certain dividend and this makes Celeron prices uncompetitive. To me, Intel deserves contempt for trading on its reputation rather than its quality.

 

[Whitedog]

How can you say AMD only concentrates on the K6 core? Not true man...

Soon, Moble Athlon and Duron will prevail... (first half of 2001)

Soon, AMD based Servers will be on the market... (later this year perhaps)

Read man! Read!

Takes time ya know

 

[TheCorm]

Durons are really good on the better boards but SiS value board brings dowm their performence quite a bit.

AMD should have come up with a mobile Athlon sooner, the K6-2 mobile is no match for Intels mobile celerons or p3's.

Let's hope they come up with a mobile Athlon and or Duron v soon.

Are there any dual Socket A boards around at the moment, if yes, any details?

Corm

 

[Rigoletto]

Whitedog, are you trying to kill me man?- put on your glasses. The word is "mainly" not only. Wake up out of your stupor.

 

[Dulanic]

No Dual Socket A until 760MP comes out.... I do know that API Networks is working on a 4way and 8way AMD server board also.

 

[Whitedog]

OK, mainly... same difference

That's still not true even. They put little effort into developing K6. Little.

 

[Rigoletto]

Grrr Whitedog, you're doing it again. No one said AMD put most effort into developing K6 chips. They concentrate their SALES in mobiles on the K6-2. That's probably a reflection on the lack of corporate recognition of them and K7 high power drains. But yes, I know it's supposed to get better...

 

[Whitedog]

hehehe.... OF course they concentrate their sales efforts on mobile K6's, that's all they have to market? hehe

I don't care anyway because I hate mobile crap. :| ...at least working on them!@@)!#&#(%)#) hehe

Nef

 

[TheCorm]

AMD do seem to be fairly slack in the mobile side of things, I'm suprised a Mobile Duron hasn't been developed already, it doesn't use huge amounts of power does it and it's not burning hot.

AMD only have a Mobile K6-2 at the moment don't they, am I right in think that there were the odd Mobile K6-3's??

Corm

 

[BurnItDwn]

100mhz Celerons are much slower then a Duron at the same speed ...

my celeron 533 at 896 (running 112FSB) performs NOWHERE near as fast as my Duron700@950 ... when i set it down to 900 ... and compare them at almost the same clock speed ... the Duron is still quite a bit faster ... except for loading photoshop ... because that takes Big advantage of SSE.

 

[Blastman]

A Celeron on a 100mhz bus will be so close to a Duron that on most applications you aren?t going to be able to tell the difference them.

In this review at .. http://www.hardwarecentral.com/hardwarecentral/reviews/2699/1

A Celeron 900 (100mhz bus) posted scores in Winstone 99 scores were within 2.5% of a Duron 900 ?

D900 ? 29.2
C900 ? 28.5

Same thing with SYSmark 2000 (12 applications) ? Anandtech ?

Duron 900 ? 158
Celeron 850 ? 151

The Celeron 850 is only 4.6% behind a Duron 900 despite a 50mhz disadvantage.

In gaming at low resolutions Celerons on a 100mhz bus will probably be about within about 10-12% of a Duron. But at higher resolutions like 1024x768 current high end graphic cards are pretty well fill limited at on 600Mhz processors so essentially again, there will be virtually no difference between the 2 processors in gaming either.