Thunderbird 1Ghz or Duron 1.2 Ghz ???

[Kntx]

Duron is 5 bones less.

I'm sure there's reviews and threads a plenty but, I'm gonna go to the store in 10 minutes.... Which is faster??? Which should it be???

 

[Athlon4all]

Hmmmm, toughie. If you oced the Duron to 133fsb, then it would definately be faster, plus it is Morgan, but the Thunderbird with a good HSF will oc to at least 1.4GHz maybe even 1.5, but at non-oced, then well, I dunno. It would prolly be a toss up.

 

[Mustanggt]

get the duron it will be faster slightly

 

[kuk]

I would say the Athlon (if it's the C model ... 266FSB). This review gives a better idea..

The Duron would be better only if you're running apps optimised for SSE.

 

[Kntx]

Athlon it is!

 

[Magicthyse]

Thanx for the advice too. I was wondering the same thing but noone has answered so far in CPU forum...
Athlon it is!

 

[John P]

I dunno guys. After reading this article I'm thinking seriously about popping a 1.2 or 1.3ghz Duron on my Abit KT7 to replace my TBird 750:

Duron 1.3Gghz review at Sharky Extreme

 

[microAmp]

<< get the duron it will be faster slightly >>

 

[Rand]

Assuming the same FSB, the Duron is generally roughly equivalent to an Athlon of 100MHz lower clockspeed. This margin is cut down to about 75MHz when comparing the Morgan core to the Thunderbird core.

In this instance the Duron will be a fair bit faster.

 

[S0me1X]

Thunderbird all the way... besides, pretty much all 1ghz tbirds can run at 1.33+ghz