hii all ,
this is my earlier mail to the forum : *************************
as an end user i find intel celeron 1.7 ghz on HIS better than Amd athlon xp 1.8 ghz on asus motherobard both with 128 mb ddr ram . i
havent
faced any cooling issues. .
******************************************** well it seems some people didnt get what i was trying to say .many here are comparing AMD to older celeron which ran it 100 fsb .
celeron 1.7 ghz and upwards are dark horses in intel's stable , they r cheap ,and real value for money . Intel itself as its marketing strategy doesnot advertise or publicise the features of celeron ( you will never see ads in t.v or print about celeron ) .So much that when i try selling a celeron machine instead of an Intel p-4 , they say but isnt Intel better ??, the common man is not even aware celeron is an Intel product. But to compete with AMD they still need a processor at the lower price bracket and hence manufactures celeron which is almost same a p-4 . celeron 1.7 has absolutely the same architecture ( 0.18 micron and 400 mhz fsb) , and same core of p-4 1.7 ghz and runs on the same motherboard that a p-4 runs on , except that celeron has a lower cache only 128 mb as compared to p-4 1.7 which has 256( or 512 ) . AMD athlon xp 1.8 ghz on the other hand runs only on 200 or 266 fsb , and also u need asus or better motherboards . AMD though i read on tech web sites and articles has host of other features which made my buy one amd 1.8 on asus , but i regret the decision , practically when i compare the 2 , i think celeron has an advantage , because it cost me less , i put the celeron on an HIS via chipset board which is 1200 rs less as compared to asus .Amd is not so popular so there r very few motherboards than can optimally use the processor , hence AMD performs better in benchmarking tests but not practically .
note: These are my personal views which i hold and i speak only out of my hardware experience of last 4 years .I dont intend to promote Intel or discourage Amd .
Nikhil Bhaskaran