Processor specs

Packard bell / Mh36-v-200
July 17, 2009 at 08:58:51
Specs: Windows vista
Intel Celeron Dual Core Processor T1600 vs AMD
Athlon X2 Dual Core Processor TK57

intel=1= 1.66GHz, 1MB L2, 667MHz FSB

amd=2= 1.9GHz, 1600MHz, 512KB Cache

2 has 3.8ghz whereas 1 has 3.2. So i thought that
was much better, but i read a thread here:

and everyone said the bigger cache was better
because the cpu diff wasnt huge.
in my case its 0.6 cpu or 0.5mb cache.

and on top of that the 3.8ghz cpu also has 1600mhz (i
dont know what this value is) vs the 667mhz that the
3.2ghz has.

so q1: what does each value mean, i understand
cache, more can decrease time processor can
read/write. I though that the 3.2 ghz an 3.8ghz was
how fast the processer worked but then that can also
be what the 1600mhz an 667mhz are so explain plez.

q2: which is better? (average use, no gaming - i
understand this auto puts intel>amd)

See More: Processor specs

Report •

July 17, 2009 at 09:30:46
If you're not using it for gaming I would go for the Intel every time, simply because they run cooler - using the stock fan in a decent case it should be much quieter - get a fanless graphics card and a decent power supply & it will be silent.

"I've always been mad, I know I've been mad, like the most of us..."

Report •

July 17, 2009 at 09:33:58
Ok but u havent compared the specs 4 me? I read that the mhz
numbers where front side bus speed. how do compare fsb with
clock speed, which is better etc.

Report •

July 17, 2009 at 09:38:47
The frequency at which a processor (CPU) operates is
determined by applying a clock multiplier to the front side
bus (FSB) speed in some cases. For example, a processor
running at 3200 MHz might be using a 400 MHz FSB. This
means there is an internal clock multiplier setting (also
called bus/core ratio) of 8. That is, the CPU is set to run at 8
times the frequency of the front side bus: 400 MHz × 8 =
3200 MHz. By varying either the FSB or the multiplier,
different CPU speeds can be achieved.

ok so now i dont know why the fsb matters as you can just
increase the multiplier (aka overclocking?) therefore bigger
cache wins? Or is it better to have the larger fsb because
then u dnt have such a larger multiplier ab thus laptop runs

Report •

Related Solutions

July 17, 2009 at 10:19:55
Sorry, but you've got just about everything wrong.

1st of all, you do NOT combine the two cores. The Intel CPU runs at 1.66GHz, not 3.2GHz...the AMD CPU runs at 1.9GHz, not 3.8GHz.

2nd, you're comparing apples with oranges. AMD & Intel use two completely different architectures, so the cache & bus speeds are not comparable. You can compare Intel vs Intel or AMD vs AMD & be able to make a reasonable conclusion as to which to choose, but when you compare AMD vs Intel, you need to have a grasp on the differences in architecture...the numbers don't tell the story.

Just as an example...Intel CPUs use the Front Side Bus (FSB), but AMD abandoned the FSB many years ago. AMD systems use the HyperTransport bus (HT) which is calculated differently. The HT bus on the AMD CPU you listed runs at 1600MHz, the Intel CPU runs at 667MHz FSB, but because of the difference (FSB vs HT bus), you can't automatically draw the conclusion that 1600MHz is better than 667MHz. You need to do your homework.

Other than that, you didn't list any other info about the two laptops/notebooks that you're comparing. The CPU is just part of the equation. What about RAM, grahics, hard drive?? You have to look at the complete picture, not just one part of it.

That being said, why would you be looking at a Intel based laptop with a Celeron, rather than one with a Dual core Pentium or Core 2 Duo?

Report •

July 17, 2009 at 10:32:12
More info:

When you see the FSB listed as 667MHz, that is not the *true* speed (aka frequency)'s the advertised speed. Intel "quad pumps" the FSB, so to get the frequency, you need to divide by 4. 667MHz FSB actually runs at 133MHz frequency. So the CPU that you mentioned which runs at 1.66GHz is actually clocked at 10 x 166MHz, not 2.5 x 667MHz. Sometimes it will run at 1.0GHz, 1.16GHz, 1.33GHz, etc. It will depend on what you're doing at the time.

Another thing...laptops vary the speed of the CPU by changing the multiplier. This keeps the temperature down & helps to preserve battery power. The CPU will not run at full speed at all times, the speed will change depending on load.

The multipler determines the speed of the CPU only....the FSB determines the speed of the system (CPU, RAM, motherboard chipset, etc).

Fior example, here's the clock settings for three different CPUs that run at 2.0GHz:

1. 15 x 133MHz (533MHz FSB)

2. 12 x 166MHz (667MHz FSB)

3. 10 x 200MHz (800MHz FSB)

A system using CPU # 3 would perform the best due to the faster FSB.

Report •

July 17, 2009 at 10:43:19
the amd is running 2g an the intel 1g. this doesnt matter to me
as if the ram is a prob i'll jus upgrade the intel to 2g, thats why i
didnt mention it.

All else the same which wud u recommend then? One has
higher cpu, the other larger cache

Report •

July 17, 2009 at 10:50:46
Have you paid any attention at all? You can not compare the two CPUs based on clock speed or cache...they are totally different. And RAM amount makes a HUGE difference on how well a system performs.

Do your homework!

Report •

July 18, 2009 at 04:36:17
Stop saying do your homework. Ive been looking into everything
on wiki but its still not 100%, especially when you cant
compare statistics that easy hence why ive given the titles of
the processors and asking which one is better? Surely an
expert would know or could use a benchmark to check.

Report •

Ask Question