Duron slower than celeron...why?

[railer]

My celly 1080 (900 @120 fsb) is faster than my new Duron 1 Ghz on my ECS K7s5a. When I OC the Duron to 1120, they pull about even. What's the deal? This is in 3dmark and Q3. My celly rig is an old Abit BE-6, w/ 256 MB RAM. Both have Radeon LE's OC'd to 185 mhz. I was thinking that the Duron was going to be about 25% faster than the celly, based on all the reviews that I had seen, but that's not the case. I've got the memory CAS values set about the same, etc. Guess if I don't come up with anything I'll have to spring for that Athlon XP.... Feel free to post any suggestions if anyone has any...thanks. I'm going to put this in the MB forum too...:|

 

[boyRacer]

Uhhh... the Celeron is castrated... if you thought that was slow... you shouldve seen the Celeron when it was still stuck at 66FSB. Something to do with less cache and instructions... unlike the P3. But the new celerons kick ass... practically a p3.

 

[Deadlifter]

Don't believe hype, believe what you're seeing for yourself.

I just got a celeron 1.1A clocked to 1.47 GHz and it's amazing how powerful it is. If I can believe Sisoft Sandra, it will run with an Athlon 1800+ and a 2.0 GHz P4 (Williamette). I know it's the end of the line for the P3 core, but Wow! what a deal for $66.

 

[Bateluer]

My 800@1066 runs neck and neck with a P4 1.5Ghz in integer performance. Bu it gets creamed in floating point performance. Its on the 100Mhz FSB Celemine core.

 

[railer]

I clocked the Duron back to default ( 1 ghz) and moved the celly to 110 mhz FSB. (990 mhz). Re-benched. They are nearly identical in 3dmark 2001, the Duron has a slight edge in Q3. I downloaded Sisoft SANDRA and was suprised to see that the CPU benchmarks came out so close. I had assumed that it was some type of video or memory conflict somewhere on the ECS board, but maybe not. Both are running Win ME. I'm thinking that there's not really that much difference between these two chips. If anybody else is running something similair let me know and we can compare scores. I'm off to scour MadOnion to see how this chip/v card performs for everybody else. Thanks to all who responded.

 

[Goose77]

it might be your motherboard that the duron is on.. that one, in my opinion sucks!!, the ABIT has better memory timings and such. now if u compaired it to the abit kt7 or kt7a you should see the duron possible either out perform or be equal. remember when cross compairing all componets should be as similar as possible to get accurate benches. also remember to set FSB to be the same or close because that was one of the biggest differences between the two the other is the cache. and just to add, if the cellery had the same cache and FSB it would beat the duron hands down. it would be like compairing a P3 to a duron!

 

[alpineranger]

The ecs k7s5a doesn't have very agressive memory timing to begin with, and on top of that the sis 735 has a rather slow memory controller, slower than that of the old kt133/133a (i'm assuming you're using sdram and not ddr). The abit on the other hand is an intel bx board, which has one (if not the) fastest sdram memory controllers ever. Unfair you say? Look at it this way. How much did the be-6 sell for when it was new? Compared to the price of a k7s5a, probably twice as much.