XP 2500+ vs. P4 2.4 GHz

[Codeine]

Regulus, AMD/Intel has their advantages. AMD is ideal for gaming, while Intel is ideal for Encoding and 3D Rendering. All the other benchmarks, Intel and AMD are pretty much neck and neck. Theirs no such thing as either being completely better.

 

[gaara]

Actually, it was widely believed that during previous generation CPU races, the orginal Athlon and Duron were generally speaking superior processors compared to their Intel counterparts (Pentium 3 and Celeron).

I think it's a very wide belief that before Intel released hyperthreading technology, AMD was basically whooping them, however they were far less known during that time period so unfortunetely no one really made a big fuss over it.

Hence why owned an AMD Athlon 900+, 1200+ and Duron 1600+ without buying a single Intel proccesor.

 

[4W4K3]

the Desktop 2500+ Barton core doesn't seem to overclock very well IMO, and it gets HOT. I'd go with the 2.4C P4 personally, because i have seen them hit well past 3.0GHz.

For stock usage though, with no chance of overclocking, i'm not really sure what i would use. I wouldn't buy either if i couldn't overclock lmao.

final decision is 2.4C P4 then....cuz it overclocks like a beast

 

[DJ-CHRIS]

The 2500 will outpeform the 2.4 celeron's by far, as the celerons mainly have a 128 cache. The AMD's have a 512, even though the new celerons have a 256 cache.

 

[4W4K3]

The 2500 will outpeform the 2.4 celeron's by far, as the celerons mainly have a 128 cache. The AMD's have a 512, even though the new celerons have a 256 cache.

just wondering...who said Celeron? Did i miss something? the 2.4C is a Northwood core and it's 512kb cache 800MHz FSB. that's what i meant if i confused anyone.