AMD Duron

Under Windows 2000 the Content Creation/Business application performance of the Duron is faster than under Win98SE but at the same time it is now as fast as the Athlon 600 and not the Athlon 700. This could be because of poor KT133 drivers under Windows 2000 (which shouldn't be the case because the KT133 is essentially the same chipset as the KX133, but we've encountered weirder things with VIA chipsets in the past). Another possibility is that under Windows 2000/NT a 64KB L2 cache, even though it is an exclusive L2 cache, simply isn't as beneficial as a 512KB off-chip, inclusive L2 cache running at a slower speed.

The most valid comparison however, is to a Celeron, and in this case the Duron is definitely faster than the 566/66 part we benchmarked and will be faster than the 700/66MHz solution which will be released shortly. It does take a back seat to the overclocked Celeron 850/100 though.

Click Here to find the lowest prices on AMD processors