Intel just got...

nick1985

Lifer
Dec 29, 2002
27,153
6
81
Originally posted by: lazybum131
No big surprises here, almost everyone knows to go AMD on a budget.

i think you would be surprised...

dumb consumer: oooh! a 2.6 Ghz CPU MUST be better than this 1.6. it has more Ghz which must mean its faster!
 

DaveSimmons

Elite Member
Aug 12, 2001
40,730
670
126
LOL, desktop celerons are garbage for anything except low-CPU-power applications like office machines or a HTPC that is playback-only.
 

Alex

Diamond Member
Oct 26, 1999
6,995
0
0
Originally posted by: nick1985
Originally posted by: lazybum131
No big surprises here, almost everyone knows to go AMD on a budget.

i think you would be surprised...

dumb consumer: oooh! a 2.6 Ghz CPU MUST be better than this 1.6. it has more Ghz which must mean its faster!

exactly!
and i wouldnt be the least bit surprised to learn that celerons sell more than durons...
 

nick1985

Lifer
Dec 29, 2002
27,153
6
81
Originally posted by: franguinho
Originally posted by: nick1985
Originally posted by: lazybum131
No big surprises here, almost everyone knows to go AMD on a budget.

i think you would be surprised...

dumb consumer: oooh! a 2.6 Ghz CPU MUST be better than this 1.6. it has more Ghz which must mean its faster!

exactly!
and i wouldnt be the least bit surprised to learn that celerons sell more than durons...

id be willing to wager my genitalia that they sell better.
 

Markfw

Moderator Emeritus, Elite Member
May 16, 2002
26,399
15,524
136
Originally posted by: Sid59
muahhaha .. the celeron 2.6 GHZ got owned by the Duron 1.6 GHZ

And the celeron costs $85 vs $41 for the Duron ! The XP2600 at $88 killed the celeron as almost twice the speed most of the time.

 

nick1985

Lifer
Dec 29, 2002
27,153
6
81
Originally posted by: Markfw900
Originally posted by: Sid59
muahhaha .. the celeron 2.6 GHZ got owned by the Duron 1.6 GHZ

And the celeron costs $85 vs $41 for the Duron ! The XP2600 at $88 killed the celeron as almost twice the speed most of the time.

but..but..but... the celeron has more Mhz...:confused:
 

Alex

Diamond Member
Oct 26, 1999
6,995
0
0
Originally posted by: nick1985
Originally posted by: franguinho
Originally posted by: nick1985
Originally posted by: lazybum131
No big surprises here, almost everyone knows to go AMD on a budget.

i think you would be surprised...

dumb consumer: oooh! a 2.6 Ghz CPU MUST be better than this 1.6. it has more Ghz which must mean its faster!

exactly!
and i wouldnt be the least bit surprised to learn that celerons sell more than durons...

id be willing to wager my genitalia that they sell better.

lol :D
i'll wager all my wars trek guys...except bobba fett.... i never risk the fett-man no matter how sure i am :D
 

Lonyo

Lifer
Aug 10, 2002
21,938
6
81
Seems like calling the Celeron a "neutered" P4 is a major understatement.

It gets fried, eaten, spat back out then sat on by the AMD procs.
 

RaynorWolfcastle

Diamond Member
Feb 8, 2001
8,968
16
81
Everyone (on Anandtech) knows that the Celeron is a dog when it comes to performance. Then again I bet Intel produces them for almost nothing whereas AMD is forced to sell the (somewhat expensive to produce) 2500+ to compete with the Celeron.

I think that this is really unfortunate, now that they have the performance crown on both the upper and lower end they should really get some marketing out there. Unfortunately, we all know that all that will happen is that AMD will put out a pathetically weak marketing campain and Intel will eat them alive when Prescott (finally) launches, regardless of performance.

In the budget CPU world, where many buyers are computer-illiterate, appearance of performance counts for more than actual performance.
 

wetcat007

Diamond Member
Nov 5, 2002
3,502
0
0
Originally posted by: franguinho
Originally posted by: nick1985
Originally posted by: lazybum131
No big surprises here, almost everyone knows to go AMD on a budget.

i think you would be surprised...

dumb consumer: oooh! a 2.6 Ghz CPU MUST be better than this 1.6. it has more Ghz which must mean its faster!

exactly!
and i wouldnt be the least bit surprised to learn that celerons sell more than durons...

lol and people complain bout AMD's PR system thing, but look at how pathetic that celery is? lol
 

WobbleWobble

Diamond Member
Jun 29, 2001
4,867
1
0
I would have liked for them to have tested a mobile Celeron with 256KB cache.

Because with laptops, you don't get much of a choice. Sometimes, the Celeron laptops are significantly cheaper than P-M and P4-M.
 

dmcowen674

No Lifer
Oct 13, 1999
54,889
47
91
www.alienbabeltech.com
Originally posted by: nick1985
Originally posted by: lazybum131
No big surprises here, almost everyone knows to go AMD on a budget.

i think you would be surprised...

dumb consumer: oooh! a 2.6 Ghz CPU MUST be better than this 1.6. it has more Ghz which must mean its faster!

Don't just say Consumer, everytime I am in any of the big Retailers like Best Buy, Microcenter, CompUSA etc, there is ALWAYS a Salesman pushing new computer buyers that the highest speed CPU is better so I witness the poor souls buying an Intel system everytime especially Celerons because even though they will not perform as good as the AMD system the Salesman sold them that it is better because the CPU speed is higher.
 

Viper96720

Diamond Member
Jul 15, 2002
4,390
0
0
Course Celerons sell more than Durons. Isn't that what's inside the cheap Dells and Gateways.
 

IPLaw

Member
Mar 23, 2002
187
0
0
I think it's time for an independent (if possible) third-party to step in with an objective (as far as possible) PR rating system. While MHz will always be useful to an extent, consumers need a single number that is consistent across competing products, like horsepower is for cars. The reality is that consumers are buying a Celeron 2.6 over an Athlon 2500+, and that is unfortunate.

(OFF SOAPBOX)
 

WobbleWobble

Diamond Member
Jun 29, 2001
4,867
1
0
It's not just the MHz number that people base the purchasing decisions on. It's the Intel branding that also appeals to the general market. Brand loyalty is not uncommon in society.

When people buy these Celeron based systems, they won't notice that split second difference when they load up their AOL, Internet Explorer or Word. They bought the name as they probably bought an Intel PC before as well so they feel they didn't step into unchartered waters.
 

deadseasquirrel

Golden Member
Nov 20, 2001
1,736
0
0
Originally posted by: nick1985id be willing to wager my genitalia that they sell better.

I'd bet mine too, but considering the countless number of individuals out there sending me email after email on how to enlarge my p3nis, I'm thinking I better keep it off the table for now until I upgrade. I mean, at first it was just the wife, but now complete strangers are noticing.

Originally posted by: DaveSimmons
LOL, desktop celerons are garbage for anything except low-CPU-power applications like office machines or a HTPC that is playback-only.

Actually, my 6y/o son has an old 1.4celery tualatin (with a ti4200). He's able to play anything he throws in there. LOTR ROTK, Simpsons H&R, Jedi Academy, JKII, Tony Hawk 3, NWN, and others. It handles things very well. I've even jumped on with him using the gamepad sometimes and the framerate is very playable, and those aren't very old games.

Now, that being said, I wouldn't stick a celery in my main rig (XP1700+ TbredB) but for a kid's machine, it's working out fine until I give him mine and build a new one for myself in 6 months. Since he's on an old Dell mobo, the 1.4 tualatin is the best I can throw in there without upgrading the whole dang thing.

 

nick1985

Lifer
Dec 29, 2002
27,153
6
81
Originally posted by: deadseasquirrel
Originally posted by: nick1985id be willing to wager my genitalia that they sell better.

I'd bet mine too, but considering the countless number of individuals out there sending me email after email on how to enlarge my p3nis, I'm thinking I better keep it off the table for now until I upgrade. I mean, at first it was just the wife, but now complete strangers are noticing.

Originally posted by: DaveSimmons
LOL, desktop celerons are garbage for anything except low-CPU-power applications like office machines or a HTPC that is playback-only.

Actually, my 6y/o son has an old 1.4celery tualatin (with a ti4200). He's able to play anything he throws in there. LOTR ROTK, Simpsons H&R, Jedi Academy, JKII, Tony Hawk 3, NWN, and others. It handles things very well. I've even jumped on with him using the gamepad sometimes and the framerate is very playable, and those aren't very old games.

Now, that being said, I wouldn't stick a celery in my main rig (XP1700+ TbredB) but for a kid's machine, it's working out fine until I give him mine and build a new one for myself in 6 months. Since he's on an old Dell mobo, the 1.4 tualatin is the best I can throw in there without upgrading the whole dang thing.

the tualatin celerons, at the time, were actually not that bad. the celerons nowadays just absolutely blow chunks.