P4 Celeron 2.8 vs. Athlon XP

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
J

joshuawinslow

Distinguished
Feb 17, 2003
19
0
18,510
I'm looking to build a computer for a mom and daughter who will not be power users at all. They will primarily use the computer to search the net, play mp3s, play shockwave-type games, and use an Office suite.

What is the best route to go for them:

Intel Celeron (2.8 GHz or so)
or
Athlon XP (not sure what speed is comparable to celeron)

I don't think they want to go with Athlon64.

Could you tell me a good place to buy a bundled motherboard-CPU combo (I know that can save them some money if there is a place like that).
 
Honestly, I expect an XP2000 would beat a Celeron 2.8. I know a couple places in the UK who do motherboard bundles (£104 ic VAT, for XP2000, motherboard, 256 ddr 2100 ram) but obviously no idea about usa.

A nice 2500 coupled with an NForce 2 board, you may be able to change the fsb from 166 to 200 for a free 3200, if you get a good chip. 512mb 2700 ram, a 80 gig hard drive and the onboard GF4 MX graphics chip, with a CDRW and DVD drive...would be perfect IMO, and dirt cheap!

XP2000, 512 ddr 2700ram, GF4 MX440, XP Pro
 
Ditto! No Celeron! ABIT NF7-S & XP-2500 will do anything they need much better. :smile:


Abit IS7 - 2.8C @ 3.5ghz - Mushkin PC4000 (2 X 512) - Sapphire 9800Pro - TT 420 watt Pure Power
Samsung 120gb ATA-100 - Maxtor 40gb ATA - 100
Sony DRU-510A - Yellowtail Merlot
 
That's not quite as simple as it sounds... (comparing the P4 2.8 to an AthlonXP). The early P4 2.8's were roughly comparable to an XP 2800 (although that's not what the speed rating really meant, it's darn close). The more recent P4s are faster (not in mhz, but in getting stuff done), so you'ld probably need an XP3000 or 3200 to match it's speed for general use.

The Athlon XP64's speed ratings (2800, 3000, etc.) are generally comparable to the newest P4s clock rates.

For general use, I would get an AthlonXP. Get the fastest one you can. For the 'most bang for the buck, I think the 2500/2600 is right at that point in the price/performance curve where going a little slower doesn't save you much $, but going a little faster costs you more.

For some longevity, where they probably won't want/need a newer machine for a while I would go for at a minimum the 2600, and if you could swing it, get the 3200.

Mike.
 
well a A64 2800 is faster than any 2.8ghz p4...it go on for all the p4/amd64 comparison...



Athlon 2700xp+ (oc: 3200xp+ with 200fsb)
Radeon 9800pro (oc: 410/360)
1024mb pc3200 (5-3-3-2)
Asus A7N8X-X
 
athlon xp 2500+ mobile :wink: overclock to like 2.4ghz, should be fine...

<font color=blue>AthlonXP-M 2500+(12x211)</font color=blue><font color=green>Abit NF7-S</font color=green><font color=red>Kingston DDR400 2x256Mb</font color=red>
 
I'm sure they'd be happy with either really, and perhaps even something slower. An XP2500+ is dirt cheap, especially for the performance it still offers, but maybe a refurbished/used PC with ~1 GHz P3/Athlon could be an even better deal ? CPU speed isn't going to limit them, just make sure you get enough RAM (256 at the very least, but 512 is better) and a fast enough harddisk, those will make a much bigger difference in their experience than the speed of the cpu. My mother uses a 1 GHz Duron, but with 512 Mb and a leftover 7200 rpm disk, the thing screams for what she uses it for. To be honest, it boots maybe 2x quicker than my 2500+ :) and boot delay is about the only delay she'll ever notice (and slow websites obviously)

= The views stated herein are my personal views, and not necessarily the views of my wife. =
 
Hmmm, fair point - but when the abit nf7 2.0 and xp2500, 512mb ram and 80gb hdd could be had for around £200, you can't really go wrong! I'd go for the faster option, though I think talk of the 2800, 3200 is overkill in all honesty.

XP2000, 512 ddr 2700ram, GF4 MX440, XP Pro
 
>Hmmm, fair point - but when the abit nf7 2.0 and xp2500,
>512mb ram and 80gb hdd could be had for around £200, you
>can't really go wrong!

I'm just assuming a used/refurbished 1 GHz computer is cheaper than a new 2500+ one. Of course if a 2500+ fits the budget easily, go for it, but if budget is top priority, you should be able to deliver something completely satisfying for even less money.

= The views stated herein are my personal views, and not necessarily the views of my wife. =
 
An AMD XP-2800 to 3000 would compare to a stock 2.8C Northwood. Don't get fooled into thinking the Celeron is a real threat here. It's just a marketing gimmick. The fact of the matter is an XP Mobile overclocked to 2.36ghz is an equal to my P4 2.8C overclocked to 3.4ghz with the same video card, the same amount of comparable memory, and the same OS. The Celeron is nothing but a crippled P4 at best. A 2.8 Celeron would have trouble keeping up with an Xp-2000+. :smile:


Abit IS7 - 2.8C @ 3.5ghz - Mushkin PC4000 (2 X 512) - Sapphire 9800Pro - TT 420 watt Pure Power
Samsung 120gb ATA-100 - Maxtor 40gb ATA - 100
Sony DRU-510A - Yellowtail Merlot
 
Re: A 2.8 Celeron would have trouble keeping up with an Xp-2000+.

Don't intel now make a celron "D" @ 2.8.. I don't believe the guy stated which version celeron and I'm reasonably sure a 2.8 "D" version would beat an athlon xp 2000+.

If I glanced at a spilt box of tooth picks on the floor, could I tell you how many are in the pile. Not a chance, But then again I don't have to buy my underware at Kmart.
 
ive read a benchmark a month or two ago comparing a Duron (applebred) 1.6ghz to a Celeron 2.8, and the Duron came out winning in just about every test. If i can find the benchmark, ill post it later :)


Of course theres those new Celerons, but personally i dont know how available they are. but still, the Celerons are way overpriced.

-------
<A HREF="http://www.albinoblacksheep.com/flash/you.html" target="_new">please dont click here! </A>

Brand name whores are stupid!
 
The new celeron is a different socket also and the motherboards are very new and expensive. I wouldn't go that route. Get an athalon xp.

My kids athalon xp 2000+ killed my 2.4 celeron. A $57.00 chip compared to a $65.00 chip. The only advantage to going the celeron route is you could easily upgrade the machine to a full fledged pentium 4 machine at a later date. Full fledged p4's are better than most athalon xp's. Also the athalon xp's are fixing to go the way of the dinosaur and are going to be replaced with a sempron here soon.

Either way you go, I think it will meet your needs.
 
Semprons are merly Tbred athlonXPs, probably just like your sons 2000+ (or palomino, which is the same chip, just hotter and bigger)

-------
<A HREF="http://www.albinoblacksheep.com/flash/you.html" target="_new">please dont click here! </A>

Brand name whores are stupid!
 
Get Athlon XP 2400+

------------
<A HREF="http://geocities.com/spitfire_x86" target="_new">My Website</A>

<A HREF="http://geocities.com/spitfire_x86/myrig.html" target="_new">My Rig</A> & <A HREF="http://geocities.com/spitfire_x86/benchmark.html" target="_new">3DMark score</A>
 
I would NOT recommend a "New" system for such uses. A new system would be a waste of money. In fact, a 5-year old system could do the task (running XP if you upgraded the RAM).

You should check out the cheapest complete systems from places like TigerDirect and Compgeeks. They have left over discontinued systems for around $300 that are at least 5x what these people need.

<font color=blue>Only a place as big as the internet could be home to a hero as big as Crashman!</font color=blue>
<font color=red>Only a place as big as the internet could be home to an ego as large as Crashman's!</font color=red>
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom