Celeron Processors

[kryptonic]

So Im getting ready to buy a laptop and im looking at all the different ones. I was going to buy an Acer with a celeron processor until a friend of mine said that the celeron processors dont run as fast. Is this true? Any feedback is greatly appreciated.

[nihil]

Hi, Celeron processors run as fast as they say they do. I think your friend was referring to them having a smaller cache, so they are not as powerful as the top range processors?

[Syini666]

Older Celerons sucked pretty bad, but the newer ones seem pretty decent and have served me quite well in my new Toshiba Satellite, so don't let your friend scare you away, and as for Acer my roommate has one and it hasn't given him any real problems outside flaky bluetooth so go for it if you find one that serves your purpose and gets good customer reviews.

[kryptonic]

ok awesome....thanks for the feedback guys. Im so excited to get my laptop

[morganlefay]

Celerons are fine ....just stuff it with lots of RAM

although I recently bought an ACER laptop for a VP...with an AMD chip xp pro, 1GIG ram...that just screamed..

I want one

MLF

[mohaughn]

You get what you pay for. I don't care for the celeron processors. The battery life is not the greatest compared to pentium-m, core duo, or cd2 chips. The speed difference is also really noticable. But I've always fealt that for what I do I benefit more from higher amounts of processor cache than having say 2GB of ram.

Also keep in mind the bus speed and the memory speed, along with the width of the memory pipe. There is a lot more that determines the speed of the machine than just the clock cycles of the processor. I have a 5 year old pentium 4 1.8(845 chipset) on what was a very nice ASUS motherboard at the time with RAMBUS RDRIMMS and it still smokes a lot of machines that I see at work with "faster" celeron processors.

[gothic_type]

Like mohaughn's saying, don't trust clock speed alone. I know, for example, that some MIPS processors have been able to outperform X86 based cpus with much higher clock speeds because of the different architecture used. If you're really interested in comparing performances check out The Standard Performance Evaluation Corporation site.

ac

[Blunted One]

Celerons suck.

They are better now, but come on guys as someone on here told me cache is king and with the amount of cache on those celerons they wouldn't pass for jesters

[morganlefay]

Well it mostly will comes down to what you are doing with the machine...

if its just email, surfing, etc...a cele will do...with lots of RAM for your AV and anti crapware programs, firewalls etc

anywho

my .02 cdn

MLF

[nihil]

Well,

It all depends on what you want to use it for. The Celeron was designed for the low end budget market where its performance would be adequate. I suppose it compares to the AMD Sempron and earlier Duron?


mohaughn is quite right, it is a matter of balancing your system. I would be wary of the Celeron-D if you plan on doing anything moderately graphics intensive