Right now CPU is dominated between Intel and AMD. My question is what difference are there between respective CPUs, Centrino, Celeron, Athlon, Sempron and Turion. Except for CPU speed, they all seem to look alike to me.
page 1 of 1 24 total items
-
- Aug 28, 2005
- Gallery
-
They way they are made.
This signature violates the signature guidelines, thus it has been removed.
- Aug 28, 2005
- Gallery
MSGNoodle
woot
-
AMD is currently putting Intel in a world of hurt, in terms of desktop processors. And I'm biased towards Intel. Their main differences are their chip designs/core designs. A while back AMD used to have processors that ran real hot and toasted, but they fixed that. Intel, in my opinion, has always designed their processors with reliability in mind, they were the first to incorperate an auto-stop fail-safe that killed the processor when it overheated. AMD soon followed.
Right now AMD would be your best bet for the cheapest/fastest processors -- especially for gaming.Intel still holds a strong hold in the server (Xeon processors) and mobile (Pentium M) processors. Their Xeons are real reliable and their M processors were the first to do the processor throttling, which saves lots of power. AMD is sort of making a stand in the server market with their opteron processors. They also happen to be in the lead with their 64bit processors.
Intel says they're going to make a new chip layout, since they've pretty much maxed the potential of their old netburst chip design.
When it comes to the names (Centrino, Celeron, Athlon, Duron, etc...) they signify different chip designs, or something like that. It's 2am and I'm tired. In short the processors are classed according to their design. Centrino is Intel's mobile processors with built in WiFi, Celeron is Intels crap processors (imo), and so forth...
- Aug 28, 2005
- Gallery
-
Wow, thanks much for your concise explanation on difference between AMD and Intel processors. :)
- Aug 28, 2005
- Gallery
-
Quote by MSGNoodleCentrino is Intel's mobile processors with built in WiFi
That's a pretty good explanation MSGNoodle, because caramba it's rather difficult to explain 'processors' in a few sentences. Just one correction though, Centrino isn't the name for Intel's mobile processor (That's the Pentium M or Celeron M). but the name for a specific component-set on a laptop. Taken from Intel's site:
Intel Centrino mobile technology components are:* The Intel Pentium M Processor
* The Intel 855 chipset
* The Intel PRO/Wireless 2200/2915 miniPCI network cardFor the rest, I agree with you 100% :)
- Aug 28, 2005
- Gallery
-
i like amd better, i have no idea why tho XD
- Aug 28, 2005
- Gallery
-
- Aug 28, 2005
- Gallery
Archer79
Nerdly Ghost
-
Quote by mughiRight now CPU is dominated between Intel and AMD. My question is what
difference are there between respective CPUs, Centrino, Celeron,
Athlon, Sempron and Turion. Except for CPU speed, they all seem to look
alike to me.I'm an AMD fan right now. ...From my perspective, it looks like Intel has gotten bogged down with marketing ploys, and has lost total sight of performance...
On a side note, a thread with a significant number of replies was started on this topic about a week ago.
- Aug 28, 2005
- Gallery
-
I would take the AMD Athlon64 and X2s, because of their better thermal character (relative to the major competition) and solid 64-bit support. Between Semprons and Celerons, there is not much more to be said. :)
- Aug 28, 2005
- Gallery
-
AMD and Intel haev different appraoches to chip design and performance. Looking at intels history, they rely heavily on increasing the number of operations per second that a CPU can perform (clock speed) and are only recently moving away from this philosophy.
AMD on the other hand spend more time increasing the amount of work their chips do per clock cycle rather than just increasing the number of cycles themselves. This is why AMD chips still perform on a similar level as their intel counterparts yet are clocked at a lower speed.
Really it comes down to preference, because both chips have their positives and negatives.
- Aug 28, 2005
- Gallery
-
Quote by jonsey32
Really it comes down to preference, because both chips have their
positives and negatives.
Call me ignorant or a fanboy, but what are the positives and negatives of each chip? As far as I am aware, Intel chips are not very good current choices. Performance is generally below the competition and heat output is ridiculous. This is made even more significant for someone like me who is concerned about reducing heat generation and hence fan noise.Regards.
- Aug 28, 2005
- Gallery
-
Athlon series- aim at high performance users and gamers.
There is no more AMD Athlon's if you want AMD Athlon's you need to get AMD Athlon 64's
Opteron- used in Workstations and Servers
Sempron- built to compete with the Celeron, low-end budget line aim
at value users.
Turion- a mobile technology, which I think is not a processor but a set of components combined to be called Turion. But according to AMD's site, they don't seem to explain it very clearly.
Opteron- uses for Workstations, and high-end servers.
Athlon X2- dual coreCeleron- low end aim a people who is on a budget! :) XP
Celeron D- a improvement on its low end budget processor with
a faster FSB and larger cache! Also 64 bit support and NX execute disable bit.**LGA775 only
Celeron: FSB 400Mhz, cache 128kb or 256KB
Celeron D: FSB 533Mhz, cache 256KBPentium 4- used for main stream users. basically for gaming and some what
cpu intensive tasks.Pentium 4 w/HT is actually one physical processor and one virtual, it increased peformance dramatically over the standard P4's. Therefore you can run 2 applications at once.
Penitum 4 Extreme Edition: Aim at very high-end gamers and it's very, very, very expensive!!!
Some called it the Emergency Edition while others called it the Expensive Edition :)
a EE processor starts out at aprox $1,000 and up.
Pentium D- Dual-core aim at users who does multi-tasking. It's basically the Extreme Edition but with HT turn off. Used for entry-level workstations and Servers.
It performes better than the P4 w/HT. Click on the link below and on the right-hand side of the page you should see a demo.
P4 w/HT vs PDPenitum Extreme Editon (pee) :)
It's dual-core with HT which make a total of 4 processors 2 physical and 2 virtual.
The only time will get to see a 4 thread processor is if you are using a Intel Xeon processor
which is used for Workstations and Servers.Xeon/ Xeon MP- used for mid-range/high-end workstations and servers.
Itanium/Itanium 2 used for very high-end servers. Basically only Enterprise can afford this type of processor.
Centrino- It's explain beautifully by KurriKlown, but just one thing missing.
According to a mag: notebooks with out the Intel Wifi adapter can only be called the Pentium M, while notebooks with all 3 components can be called Centrino.
- Aug 28, 2005
- Gallery
-
At the moment AMD are ahead in terms of chip design, but over the past few years the top chip has been swapping between Intel and AMD.
Put simply, Intels chips are ok for a broad range of things but don't excel in any of them. AMD's chips are extremely good at handling a large number of calculations, for example the floating-point calculations found in games but fall short when it comes to things like video editting and day to day use when running multiple applications.
That is why many of the high end prebuilt games machines built by guys like Alienware are often based on an AMD. And while many of intels chips are hotter than their AMD counterparts, Intel have the advantage of the Pentium M line, which is insanely powerful, cool and very low in power consumption. AMD do not have a single chip that can compare when you take power consumption, heat output and processing power.
- Aug 28, 2005
- Gallery
-
Quote by Archer79
I'm an AMD fan right now. ...From my perspective, it looks like Intel
has gotten bogged down with marketing ploys, and has lost total sight
of performance...
On a side note, a thread with a significant number of replies was
started on this topic about a week ago.
http://forum.minitokyo.net/showthread/30814/Oops it didn't occur to me to do my search also using AMD & Intel Processor as subject.. ^_^'
And thanks also for tiki223 for very detailed explanation of CPU and components and jonsey32 for which chip is suited for what task.
- Aug 28, 2005
- Gallery
-
dothan or xeon
- Aug 28, 2005
- Gallery
-
Intel Celeron : Intel Pentium with less cache, ending up in low preformance chip that is cheaper
Intel Pentium : Good cpu for desktop usage and development and seems to be quite reliable in graphics and video
Intel Xeon : good server cpu
Intel Centrino : Good for laptops, and is rather a good cpuAMD Sempron: kind a the same like the intel celeron
AMD AthlonXP: Nice cpu but kind a old
AMD Athlon64: good all around cpu
AMD Opteron: Nice server cpuIt realy depends on your taste.
Just don't get an intel pentium 4 Extreme Edition 90nm HT.
Mine melted without any clear reason...- Aug 28, 2005
- Gallery
-
Quote by grizlyeddothan or xeon
Dothan is the code name for
Intel's Pentium M processor!Xeon/ Xeon MP is for mid-range/high-end workstations and servers.
For notebooks of course the Penitum M. It actually performes better than
the P4's!- Aug 28, 2005
- Gallery
MSGNoodle
woot
-
I heard someone mention the Itanium processors. The original Itanium was created by intel working in cooperation with HP, but HP bailed and the Itanium didn't get as far as they expected. They nicknamed it the Itanic, I believe. The Itanium 2, I've never tried out this processor myself, the only real neat feature about it is its 64-bit core. But if you want a 64bit get something by AMD. AMD is the leader, their processors give the biggest bang for the buck -- and yet I still continue to buy Intel processors. Supposevly intel processors are much better at multi tasking, but there is no real significant difference from what I've experienced.
I don't really have much to say in favor of Intel, it's just that I've always used intel processors way back when they released their 808xx processors. It's just my personal preference, hopefully their new chip design will make them a stronger competitor in the future. But if you want to run a server, want a power-saving laptop, or do your own video/audio/image editing, then an intel solution sounds right. There's a bunch of motherboards out there with dual xeon solutions, and the xeons usually can take more of a beating than the normal P4's. The Pentium M's have that cool clock throttling feature (although I think AMD has a processor that does this now). It just depends on your opinion, i guess.
Also, someone said that their P4EE melted, kind of wierd, most processors today will restart the computer before it fries. It looks like intel reached their limits with the Pentium 4 processor, and their extreme edition design sort of pushes it right to its limit. If you're willing to go that far, you might as well get and AMD athlon or opteron, your wallet will thank you.
- Aug 29, 2005
- Gallery
-
I have learned a lot from all the nice people giving me information that I have been seeking. Particular thanks again to MSGNoodle for another concise explanation of difference between various AMD and Intel CPU.
And thank you too, bart416. :D
- Aug 29, 2005
- Gallery
-
Quote by bart416Intel Celeron : Intel Pentium with less cache, ending up in low preformance chip that is cheaper
Intel Pentium : Good cpu for desktop usage and development and seems to be quite reliable in graphics and video
Intel Xeon : good server cpu
Intel Centrino : Good for laptops, and is rather a good cpu
AMD Sempron: kind a the same like the intel celeron
AMD AthlonXP: Nice cpu but kind a oldAMD Athlon64: good all around cpu
AMD Opteron: Nice server cpuIt realy depends on your taste.
Just don't get an intel pentium 4 Extreme Edition 90nm HT.
Mine melted without any clear reason...A helpful breakdown, though it also illustrates not much difference, lol! I remember people telling my AMD was the one to go to for gaming, but the one I've had did nothing but give me trouble (though it was probably the whole package [Compaq...*shudder*], I can't bring myself to try it again) !
- Aug 29, 2005
- Gallery
-
Quote by ShkiraA helpful breakdown,
though it also illustrates not much difference, lol! I remember people
telling my AMD was the one to go to for gaming, but the one I've had
did nothing but give me trouble (though it was probably the whole
package [Compaq...*shudder*], I can't bring myself to try it again) !Nothing like having a bad experience to turn you off from trying the same company again. ^_^'
- Aug 29, 2005
- Gallery
-
Compaq: Defination, compressed parts into an aluminum box.
Great for keeping papers down in the wind, but not worth it to add power and a monitor to.
Lately, it seems to me as if AMD has upped its prices almost comparable to Intel's current prices.
"Never underestimate the power of human stupidity..."
"One of life's greatest gifts, the gift of making a mistake."
- Aug 29, 2005
- Gallery
-
don't forget.. ddr2 ram only works with p4.. so that should be a very good reason to spend some more money in a intel cpu..
although i use amd64^^
- Aug 29, 2005
- Gallery
-
Quote by Jacedon't forget.. ddr2 ram only works with p4.. so that should be a very good reason to spend some more money in a intel cpu..
Not really. Currently, ddr2 isn't much faster than ddr1. And it is more expensive too! Sure, ddr2 will replace ddr1 in the (near) future, but currently you're just wasting money for a minimal performance gain. I wouldn't call that a very good reason.
- Aug 29, 2005
- Gallery
page 1 of 1 24 total items
Back to Computers & Internet | Active Threads | Forum Index
Only members can post replies, please register.