Atomic Systems

Regarding your PM, you'll definately need a CPU fan and heatsink. Bear in mind the CPU will probably come in a TINY box...

jjules wrote:Hmm...I'd dig out my old PC magazines and find evidence for why he should want a Celeron over a Duron. I'm getting biased towards them now, as my PC with a Duron in does not work! All my magazines are at my mum's house, over 70 miles away (and the postage on them would be HUGE!)

A Celeron does not out pace a duron. It may do for Multimedia benchmarks, but for Direct 3D&OpenGL (game performance) Duron is light years ahead.

My previous post (hastily typed at work) said this, and that for the same price as a Celly you can get a proper Athlon which gives PIV performance!

As I also mentioned (throuhg the typos), the only practical justification for getting a celly, would be if your existing motherboard supported it and you wanted to keep your existing board thus saving money.

For the same price as a 2.6 Celly, you could get a 2.7 Athlon, which is on a par with the PIV and wipes the floor with the Celeron.

AMD provides much better value for money than intel. Spend £50 on an AMD and you'll need to spend 2-3 times that to get an intel which performs at a similair standard!

With regards to your Duron not working, maybe you need to run some diags on it? I know plenty of people who run Durons and have recently built 14 Athlon XP workstations for my work, all of which have operated and performed flawlessly.

OK, I know I said I would not continue arguing, as the author of this thread had mentioned this thread is considered closed...

I know AMD CPUs are better for multi-media work. That is not what I was complaining about.

What I was complaining about was you were putting down the Celeron because it's only real value is if your system already supports them, and you do not want to spend money on a new board. OK, fair point, I suppose...

Bear in mind that there are two camps of fans, if you will, that both support their own favoured CPU manfacturer...I'm in Intel's at the moment because my PC with a Duron in it doesn't work as it should do, yet my ancient Pentium PC still works (admittedly very slowly, but still goes)...

If you read the first few replies on this thread, you will notice what CPU he is currently using. It is a Celeron, but Socket 370 is obsolete, unless you want to put a VIA 1000MHz CPU in it...

Obviously, to future-proof a PC, you need something much faster. Plus, the speed difference will be easily noticeable with the CPU he has now ordered. A new motherboard was the way to go in terms of what he can do in the future with it. This board would support an acceptable speed CPU. Which is why he has ordered it.

As I said before, I'm getting biased more towards the Intel CPU fanbase. That was not the reason I suggested a Celeron though. As Baily9531 is already using a system with Intel parts in it, I guess it seemed more natural to stay with Intel. This, of course, was only a suggestion. Baily9531 chose the board and CPU himself. If I had been asked to order it, I might have chose something different.

Besides, I originally was looking at processors to fit his current motherboard. As there was nothing worthwhile getting, I saw a 2.4GHz Celeron. I looked what type of socket it fitted into, found a board that would happily accept it, and gave these suggestions out. I did not have magazines with reviews in unfortunately, but then they only tend to have expensive boards in them...

I never suggested a Duron was outpaced by a Celeron. I would never say that either. As I said, it seems more natural to follow what you already have...

If it had been me, looking for myself, I'd currently be looking up AMD CPUs and Socket A motherboards, as I had been using a system which implemented these all summer. And indeed, since February 2002, when I decided to have a new system. I thought I'd get an Athlon XP 1700+, as this would be the most that I could get with my money, and I wanted to see how AMD stood compared to the hype...