Celeron 2.93ghz

[ericvonzipper]

Hi, I've not been able to find out where a Celeron 2.93 stands in comparison to anything else. Was wondering how it compares to say and Athlon XP 2200
(1.8 ghz), or the the newer Athlon 3000's and up. I have the 2200 and was thinking of an upgrade since I found a good deal on one barebones with rebate.

Thanks

 

[Beyond]

Hi, I've not been able to find out where a Celeron 2.93 stands in comparison to anything else. Was wondering how it compares to say and Athlon XP 2200
(1.8 ghz), or the the newer Athlon 3000's and up. I have the 2200 and was thinking of an upgrade since I found a good deal on one barebones with rebate.

Thanks

i was stuck with a celeron for about two years. to say the least, it sucked. terrible for gaming, nearly impossible. i have the 2200+ and it's miles better than my old celeron. i don't know if the same holds true for one of the newer celerons, but i think it's safe to say that all of the celerons are very cheaply made and although they are cheap, there's a reason for that.

 

[ericvonzipper]

What was your old Celeron? I think the D 340 2.93 is fairly new, and gaming is the priority. Based on what I am seeing, AMD appears to be the favorite for gaming. I am seeing on Toms hardware charts that on DOOMIII and QuakeIII, the Celeron D 2.8 scores over the XP2100 by 14 on Doom, and even more on Farcy. Don't know if that's noticeable or not. But the bare bones is $139 after rebate with a 425w pwrsup and 512 meg pc3200.

Thanks

 

[34erd]

For gaming definetly upgrade. Celerons generely suck at gaming, especialy one with such low clockspeeds. An upgrade to a socket 939 A64 would definetly be worth it.

 

[tweaker]

I think the D 340 2.93 is fairly new, and gaming is the priority. Based on what I am seeing, AMD appears to be the favorite for gaming.

AMD is generally better for gaming due to their on die memory controller. The Sempron 754 is the threat to Celerons, it's their competitor.

i don't know if the same holds true for one of the newer celerons

It does not. People still tend to judge by the old S478 Celerons, with their tiny 128KB L2 they wasn't very gaming oriented (naturally).

but i think it's safe to say that all of the celerons are very cheaply made and although they are cheap, there's a reason for that.

They are budget chips but offers good performance for the price. Just like the Semprons.

Celerons generely suck at gaming, especialy one with such low clockspeeds.

The CeleronD 340 running near 3Ghz certainly don't.

An upgrade to a socket 939 A64 would definetly be worth it.

Not knowing the budget or even the needs for a higher end chip makes that statement hard to justify.

 

[Geoff]

Im pretty sure hes talking about upgrading to a Celeron D 2.93Ghz. If i were you, i'd upgrade to a Sempron if you want to game fairly well.

 

[ericvonzipper]

Hi again, Ok, just got an Xbox, not the 360. If the Celeron wasn't primarily for gaming, would it be a noticeable performance increase against an XP2200? I can put the Celeron D340 2.93ghz together with 1gig DDR400 for about $150 after rebates.
And thank you all for your input.