x404.co.uk
http://www.x404.co.uk/forum/

Athlon64 X2 - Any good?
http://www.x404.co.uk/forum/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=661		 Page 1 of 1
Author:  j17ypr [ Mon May 18, 2009 9:10 pm ]
Post subject:  Athlon64 X2 - Any good?
Hello

What is the above processor like? Its a 2.8ghz, just to be used for general PC stuff - internet, email, finances etc? Another choice is a 2ghz Celeron, both PCs are Dells & for my girlfriend's folks.

Or would I be better getting them a Core2

Thanks
Author:  Linux_User [ Mon May 18, 2009 9:13 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Athlon64 X2 - Any good?
In order it probably goes: Core 2 > Athlon X2 > Celeron.

The X2 will do "normal" PC stuff no problem. Please, buy anything but the Celery!
Author:  j17ypr [ Mon May 18, 2009 9:17 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Athlon64 X2 - Any good?
Ive never been a fan of the Celeron, but wasnt sure if the newer versions were better nowadays! Unfortunately, dont really know much about the Athlon range anymore
Author:  Linux_User [ Mon May 18, 2009 9:20 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Athlon64 X2 - Any good?
j17ypr wrote:
Ive never been a fan of the Celeron, but wasnt sure if the newer versions were better nowadays! Unfortunately, dont really know much about the Athlon range anymore


They're creaking a bit these days but it's still a Dual Core processor, so the X2 should be fine. If the cost is minor it might be worth getting the C2D instead.

Do you know the model numbers of the X2 and C2D processors involved? Eg. Athlon X2 6000+ ?

Don't get a Celery, they're still rubbish (probably always will be)!
Author:  j17ypr [ Mon May 18, 2009 9:29 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Athlon64 X2 - Any good?
I can get either a C2D E4600 (2.4Ghz), E5200 (2.5Ghz), an E6550 (2.33Ghz), or the Athlon which is 5400B.

The price difference seems to be pretty minimal really.
Author:  bally199 [ Mon May 18, 2009 10:04 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Athlon64 X2 - Any good?
Oi! :P

I have a Celeron Dual Core E1200 in my PC, and it's quicker than my sister's 3.6ghz Pentium 4-D. They only cost like £30 new, too. And overclock to 4ghz on air. :D
Author:  okenobi [ Mon May 18, 2009 10:08 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Athlon64 X2 - Any good?
If the money's the same, I'd get the 5200, just because the upgrade path is better.
Author:  Danstevens [ Tue May 19, 2009 6:37 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Athlon64 X2 - Any good?
bally199 wrote:
Oi! :P

I have a Celeron Dual Core E1200 in my PC, and it's quicker than my sister's 3.6ghz Pentium 4-D. They only cost like £30 new, too. And overclock to 4ghz on air. :D


Hmm, now the Celeries are dual core and more like a Core 2 than Netburst, I don't actually think they're that bad and it would easily run rings around the Athlon when OCed. The only problem for the little Celeron's case is the fact that this PC is likely to be kept at stock clockspeeds. Therefore, I'd have to recommend the Athlon, or better, a Core 2 duo.
Author:  Linux_User [ Tue May 19, 2009 7:54 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Athlon64 X2 - Any good?
Danstevens wrote:
bally199 wrote:
Oi! :P

I have a Celeron Dual Core E1200 in my PC, and it's quicker than my sister's 3.6ghz Pentium 4-D. They only cost like £30 new, too. And overclock to 4ghz on air. :D


Hmm, now the Celeries are dual core and more like a Core 2 than Netburst, I don't actually think they're that bad and it would easily run rings around the Athlon when OCed. The only problem for the little Celeron's case is the fact that this PC is likely to be kept at stock clockspeeds. Therefore, I'd have to recommend the Athlon, or better, a Core 2 duo.


Woah. If a Celery would outrun an Athlon X2 I'll eat my hat.
Author:  j17ypr [ Wed May 20, 2009 4:16 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Athlon64 X2 - Any good?
ended up getting a C2D E7300 2.6Ghz, which should do the job nicely i think!

Thanks for the advice
Author:  okenobi [ Thu May 21, 2009 4:48 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Athlon64 X2 - Any good?
j17ypr wrote:
ended up getting a C2D E7300 2.6Ghz, which should do the job nicely i think!

Thanks for the advice


Ample. Well done.
Author:  Danstevens [ Thu May 21, 2009 4:50 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Athlon64 X2 - Any good?
Linux_User wrote:
Danstevens wrote:
bally199 wrote:
Oi! :P

I have a Celeron Dual Core E1200 in my PC, and it's quicker than my sister's 3.6ghz Pentium 4-D. They only cost like £30 new, too. And overclock to 4ghz on air. :D


Hmm, now the Celeries are dual core and more like a Core 2 than Netburst, I don't actually think they're that bad and it would easily run rings around the Athlon when OCed. The only problem for the little Celeron's case is the fact that this PC is likely to be kept at stock clockspeeds. Therefore, I'd have to recommend the Athlon, or better, a Core 2 duo.


Woah. If a Celery would outrun an Athlon X2 I'll eat my hat.


The Celeron overclocks much better than the Athlon series of AMD processors so I would say, yes it will. Stock however, there's no way a Celery could take down the X2.

Anyway, the OP made a great processor choice.
Page 1 of 1 All times are UTC
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
https://www.phpbb.com/