P3 667mhz vs 1ghz Duron

[todpod]

All this being as equal as possible how do these relate to each other.

I going to be getting a 667 P3 soon, and either going to make that the htpc or swap some componets and use the duron for that.

Both use pc133 memory. The p3 only has 128 at this point, the duron has 512 but I can inter change them.

Thoughts

 

[Markfw]

Hard to say without benching them, but I would have to say the Duron most likely would be faster.

 

[elkinm]

Havent realy delt with this ussue in a while but from my experince the Duron would own that P3. There may be some specific tasks were the cache of the P3 might be better but not many.

 

[Cerb]

The Duron will be a good bit faster.
The P3 shoul run much cooler.

 

[AIWGuru]

Well the duron can run on faster chipsets (even Nforce 2) and can support DDR. Regardless, the duron is about equivillent to the P3 (CuMine) clock for clock so 1Ghz vs 666mhz is no competition. The duron is faster.

 

[Booster]

Originally posted by: AIWGuru
Well the duron can run on faster chipsets (even Nforce 2) and can support DDR. Regardless, the duron is about equivalent to the P3 (CuMine) clock for clock so 1Ghz vs 666mhz is no competition. The duron is faster.

Sorry, I have to disagree. I had a Duron 700 and it had the same speed as a PII-450 (seriously). On the other hand, a P3-600 beat the crap out of my Duron 700 in every area (and I'm not talking synthetic benchmarks). By and large, Duron is very slow. There's no way it's equivalent to a P3 with 256KB of cache. Yes, Athlon was about 3% faster than a Cumine P3 clock for clock, but it's not the case with a Duron, of course. And when someone looks at synthetic benchmarks and says that a Duron is faster than a P4 I can't help laughing. Put them side by side and see the difference.

 

[nick1985]

id pick the duron

 

[formulav8]

Almost every comparison I have seen is that Duron is almost the same as a similar clocked P3. I believe only games is where the P3 would take a lead. The 1ghz Duron also has the Palomino optimizations to the core. It will run cooler than the older Durons also.


Jason

 

[Booster]

Almost every comparison I have seen is that Duron is almost the same as a similar clocked P3.

Those were synthetic benchmarks. Real-world performance of these chips isn't equal (and couldn't be). In fact, you can tell a big difference running a Windows XP system on a Duron 700 and a P3 600 (the latter feels like at least twice faster).

 

[imthetechguy]

Outside of synthetic benchmarks, you'd be hard-pressed to notice the difference...the lack of any serious amount of on-die cache that the Duron sports will show in gaming, but still, not by any more than a few FPS...I've had similar processors (P3 600 & P3 750 Coppermines and Duron 1ghz), so I know from experience...if you're more of a gamer and need every FPS you can get, stick with the P3...unless you're considering overclocking said processors...the P3 667 (already running 133mhz FSB) will only reach perhaps 800mhz if you are VERY lucky...the Duron processor (running 100mhz FSB stock) should be able to do 120mhz FSB easily with decent cooling (the Morgan isn't a stellar overclocker either)...THEN you'd be more pleased with the performance of the Duron...

 

[Twista]

Originally posted by: nick1985
id pick the duron

 

[Budman]

Originally posted by: Booster

Almost every comparison I have seen is that Duron is almost the same as a similar clocked P3.

Those were synthetic benchmarks. Real-world performance of these chips isn't equal (and couldn't be). In fact, you can tell a big difference running a Windows XP system on a Duron 700 and a P3 600 (the latter feels like at least twice faster).

are you smoking crack?

The duron is the faster cpu,if you think a P3 600 feels faster then you got some serious problems setting up a AMD system properly.

 

[neutralizer]

Originally posted by: Twista

Originally posted by: nick1985
id pick the duron

 

[IPLaw]

. . . and for some numbers . . .

Toms

 

[jjyiz28]

i'd say the duron. its a morgan core(i think), so it has SSE. it the P3 is katmai, no contest duron is faster. if the P3 is coppermine, its closer, but i still think morgan duron is faster

 

[imthetechguy]

i'd say the duron. its a morgan core(i think), so it has SSE. it the P3 is katmai, no contest duron is faster. if the P3 is coppermine, its closer, but i still think morgan duron is faster

All 1ghz Durons are Morgan core, hence a crippled Palimino core...he plainly said it's a P3 667, which can be nothing other than a Coppermine...I guess we all are forgetting the one important thing here...the P3 667 is running 133mhz FSB STOCK, whereas the Duron is running 100mhz FSB STOCK...or are all of you subscribers to that "faster clock speed means better" theory?...

 

[IPLaw]

As I recall with my MSI VIA 133 chipset board (for AMD processors), if PC133 is installed, the memory operates at 133, while the fsb operates at 100. Although synthetic memory benches did not (and would not) show an improvement, the system overall was certainly faster. In any event, I would suggest everyone interested in this thread to give Tom's benches a careful look, because there is a lot of useful comparative information.

 

[todpod]

Thanks for the input, p3 for htpc then .


with 128 meg ram, win 98 or win2k?

 

[zodder]

Check out THG CPU comparison.

 

[AIWGuru]

Originally posted by: Booster

Almost every comparison I have seen is that Duron is almost the same as a similar clocked P3.

Those were synthetic benchmarks. Real-world performance of these chips isn't equal (and couldn't be). In fact, you can tell a big difference running a Windows XP system on a Duron 700 and a P3 600 (the latter feels like at least twice faster).

This just isn't true. There was something wrong with your Duron system.
I has a cumine P3 733 and a duron 700 back in the day. They were of equivelent speeds to say the least.

 

[imthetechguy]

As I recall with my MSI VIA 133 chipset board (for AMD processors), if PC133 is installed, the memory operates at 133, while the fsb operates at 100

You are indeed correct that some boards have the option to run the memory at 133mhz FSB while leaving the CPU at 100mhz FSB...if he has a board with that option, it will certainly make a difference...

128MB of RAM?...you can run W2K fairly easily and benefit from the extra stability, but if you could get at least 128 more, that would be ideal...

 

[AIWGuru]

Originally posted by: imthetechguy

i'd say the duron. its a morgan core(i think), so it has SSE. it the P3 is katmai, no contest duron is faster. if the P3 is coppermine, its closer, but i still think morgan duron is faster

All 1ghz Durons are Morgan core, hence a crippled Palimino core...he plainly said it's a P3 667, which can be nothing other than a Coppermine...I guess we all are forgetting the one important thing here...the P3 667 is running 133mhz FSB STOCK, whereas the Duron is running 100mhz FSB STOCK...or are all of you subscribers to that "faster clock speed means better" theory?...

Actually, the duron is running a 200mhz fsb stock and can support DDR

 

[imthetechguy]

Actually, the duron is running a 200mhz fsb stock and can support DDR

Well, he said he has PC133 RAM, so that means the Duron will only be running 100mhz FSB, correct?

 

[AIWGuru]

Originally posted by: imthetechguy

Actually, the duron is running a 200mhz fsb stock and can support DDR

Well, he said he has PC133 RAM, so that means the Duron will only be running 100mhz FSB, correct?

Wrong. 200mhz FSB.

 

[AIWGuru]

review of 1000mhz duron
In this in depth review, the 1Ghz duron is the equivellent of a 1ghz thunderbird athlon. In this review, you can see the 1Ghz Duron hanging close to a 1.2 Ghz p3. It will slaughter a 666mhz P3.
Incidentally, the duron has 128KB l1 cache vs the P3's 32KB and it's exlusive cache meaning that it has 192KB total.. Since the P3's cache is inclusive, you can't count the L1 as it contains redundant data.
P3 cache=256K
Duron cache=192K