Budget CPU Shootout: Clash of the 'rons
by Derek Wilson on December 4, 2003 10:55 AM EST- Posted in
- CPUs
Business Winstone 2004
PC Magazine and VeriTest have just recently released a new version of their Winstone tests. The goal of the test is to model normal computer usage patterns and compare how well systems do across the board. For the Business version of the test, this involves surfing the internet, using Office, and running a handful of other common utilities and programs.As we can see by the graph, all the AMD processors performed better at this test than any of the Intel CPUs. What's also important to note is that a score of a 10.0 here is about the performance level of a 1GHz Pentium III, which should help you put the Celeron's performance in perspective.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
97 Comments
View All Comments
srue - Thursday, December 4, 2003 - link
#16 Kristopher:That's probably what I'm going to do, but it would be nice if I didn't have to.
Spacecomber - Thursday, December 4, 2003 - link
Speaking of Tualatins (#19), where are the the Tualatin Celerons? ;-) They have 256kb of cache, making them very similiar to coppermine PIIIs$40 for a Celeron 1.2 (which overclocks easily to 1.6 on a 133 mhz bus). I'd be curious to see how it stacked up against the P4 Celerons.
Space
HammerFan - Thursday, December 4, 2003 - link
lol @ Kyler's comment, I'm sure he's right :Dtfranzese - Thursday, December 4, 2003 - link
good comparison Derek, I knew AMD would be faster but the margin was surprising to say the least.Kyler - Thursday, December 4, 2003 - link
#22 here:Ack sorry guys was just testing my login from a few months again.My comment to #20, you're just pissed cause you wanted to show her your sprocket :p
Kyler - Thursday, December 4, 2003 - link
DerekWilson - Thursday, December 4, 2003 - link
So, I know I didn't explain this, but we used 2x256MB memory modules in each system, and both the AMD and Intel systems were running in Dual Channel mode.In other words, The Intel CPU was supplied with plenty of memory bandwidth. There may have been some small issues with the clocks not matching, but we made everything run as fast as we could, and if it made a difference at all, it would be negligable.
sprockkets - Thursday, December 4, 2003 - link
Or in other words she bought the Compaq and not the computer I was going to build.sprockkets - Thursday, December 4, 2003 - link
Without cache and fast FSB and memory the P4/selloutron are crap. I thought though that some of the bottlenecks were removed, but I guess not, a simple 1.6ghz processor kills most if not all Intel's low end all the time.That also pisses me off, I'm pretty sure that 2 years ago a potential customer of mine went for a 1.6 Celeron P4 series processor instead of a 1ghz P3 Tulatin. She said I'm going to pass, she of course didn't know why I was sticking in a "slower" processor.
EglsFly - Thursday, December 4, 2003 - link
Some people are blinded by clock speed... Intel knows this and will continue to design chips to sell to the unwise. It wouldn't surprise me if Intel would design a chip that clocked 5GHz, but performed like a 1GHz Pentium III. People would still buy it.Its time for the average joe to wake up already!
Smell the crap Intel is shoveling...