Results 1 to 16 of 16
-
12-21-2004, 02:15 PM #1Newbie
- Join Date
- Aug 2004
- Location
- Brazil
- Posts
- 16
Pentium, Celeron, Barton, Sempron, Athlon...
Can someone gimme an idea about the better and the worst processor listed below? Considering an overall performance and also same RAM, clock, etc...
Athlon - Sempron - Opteron - Barton - Pentium - Pentium HT (i've heard that the HT engine sometimes slows Pentium's performance) - Xeon - Celeron.
I think they're all that i've saw hehe.
Edit: To clarify, i want to know it:
better
bitbetter
moreless
.
.
.
well, it's still a serverLast edited by Cassianno; 12-21-2004 at 02:19 PM.
-
12-21-2004, 02:25 PM #2Managed Hosting Expert
- Join Date
- Jan 2004
- Location
- North Yorkshire, UK
- Posts
- 4,164
Right lets put them in order, couldn't decide between the Pentiums and the Athlons, very close, but I ranked AMD higher due to the nice price difference.
Going from worst, to best:
-Intel Celeron
-AMD Sempron
-Intel Pentium
-AMD Athlon
-AMD Barton
-Intel Pentium w/ht
-Intel Xeon
-AMD Opteron.
HTH
Dan█ Dan Kitchen | Technical Director | Razorblue
█ ddi: (+44) (0)1748 900 680 | e: dkitchen@razorblue.com
█ UK Intensive Managed Hosting, Clusters and Colocation.
█ HP Servers, Cisco/Juniper Powered BGP Network (AS15692).
-
12-21-2004, 02:37 PM #3Web Hosting Master
- Join Date
- Jun 2003
- Location
- Indiana, US
- Posts
- 1,355
My list:
- Celeron
- Sempron
- Athlon
- Pentium IV
- Pentium IV w/HT
- Barton
- Xeon
- Operton
-
12-21-2004, 03:03 PM #4Aspiring Evangelist
- Join Date
- May 2004
- Posts
- 398
Originally posted by HstCreations
My list:
- Celeron
- Sempron
- Athlon
- Pentium IV
- Pentium IV w/HT
- Barton
- Xeon
- Operton
I agree!!
AMD Rulez!!!
-
12-21-2004, 03:15 PM #5Junior Guru
- Join Date
- Apr 2004
- Location
- Florida, USA
- Posts
- 186
My List (Web server based)
- Celeron
- Sempron
- Athlon
- Pentium IV w/HT
- Pentium IV
- Athlon XP Barton Core
- Xeon
- Operton
-
12-21-2004, 03:34 PM #6Disabled
- Join Date
- Sep 2004
- Posts
- 141
Is Barton really better than P4w/HT?
-
12-21-2004, 03:37 PM #7Poooooonnyyy :*
- Join Date
- Jan 2003
- Location
- Canada
- Posts
- 5,073
Originally posted by CISupport
Is Barton really better than P4w/HT?
A lot of the numbering dates back to the old p4's, before the northwood (that the right name?) core, at which point a AXP 1700+ blew the socks off a 1.7Ghz p4
~FranciscoBuyVM - OpenVZ & KVM Based VPS Servers - Chat with us
- All popular VPN methods supported
- Affordable offloaded MySQL & DDoS protection
- 5GB backup space, unmetered private LAN bandwidth & native IPv6 included. All with a strong serving of pony
-
12-21-2004, 04:38 PM #8Web Hosting Master
- Join Date
- Jun 2003
- Location
- Indiana, US
- Posts
- 1,355
IMO the 3200 is only beaten by the P4 Extremes. Stock P4s, even with HT enabled fall short.
-
12-21-2004, 04:44 PM #9Junior Guru Wannabe
- Join Date
- Nov 2004
- Posts
- 36
I have both dual xeon 2.8 (HT on) and a dual opteron 242 web server...
The Opteron smokes the Xeon
-
12-21-2004, 06:25 PM #10Newbie
- Join Date
- Aug 2004
- Location
- Brazil
- Posts
- 16
Originally posted by ImaNewb
The Opteron smokes the Xeon
Thanks all guys, i've changed my mind between some processors, the ranks are really good and seems to be the same, Celeron = 0, Opteron = 10 hehe.
-
12-21-2004, 07:58 PM #11Junior Guru Wannabe
- Join Date
- Nov 2004
- Posts
- 36
Originally posted by Cassianno
Sorry, what do u man? The Opteron is better? Hehehe
Joking
Opteron is more efficient and faster caching pages, MySQL, etc....
-
12-21-2004, 08:10 PM #12THE Web Hosting Master
- Join Date
- Jan 2003
- Location
- Chicago, IL
- Posts
- 6,957
Isn't the Sempron the same thing as the normal Athlons?? Why the difference in the rankings? From everything I've seen they're basically the same thing, just at different clock speeds. Only difference now is that the Athlon64 is the top of the AMD heap, and they didn't want to use the Athlon name for their "budget" line even though they were basically Athlon chips.
Karl Zimmerman - Founder & CEO of Steadfast
VMware Virtual Data Center Platform
karl @ steadfast.net - Sales/Support: 312-602-2689
Cloud Hosting, Managed Dedicated Servers, Chicago Colocation, and New Jersey Colocation
-
12-21-2004, 08:17 PM #13Retired Moderator
- Join Date
- May 2004
- Location
- Toronto, Canada
- Posts
- 5,105
I think the semperon has less cache than the athlons.
My list is the same as amlahdi's.
-
12-22-2004, 03:14 AM #14THE Web Hosting Master
- Join Date
- Jan 2003
- Location
- Chicago, IL
- Posts
- 6,957
Originally posted by coolraul
I think the semperon has less cache than the athlons.
My list is the same as amlahdi's.Karl Zimmerman - Founder & CEO of Steadfast
VMware Virtual Data Center Platform
karl @ steadfast.net - Sales/Support: 312-602-2689
Cloud Hosting, Managed Dedicated Servers, Chicago Colocation, and New Jersey Colocation
-
12-22-2004, 07:17 AM #15Newbie
- Join Date
- Aug 2004
- Location
- Brazil
- Posts
- 16
OOps, i forgot to mention Duron... Or is Sempron the same?
-
12-22-2004, 08:44 AM #16Junior Guru Wannabe
- Join Date
- Feb 2002
- Posts
- 41
Sempron replaced the Duron. The comparisons get convoluted above the 2800+ when the architecture changes. Guess that doesn't really matter cause I've only seen hosts offering Socket A based Semprons.