People with celerons

On Mon, 5 Jan 2004 09:37:49 -0500
"hklingon" wrote:

Last time I checked this group wasnt about nvidia motherboards but
nvidia videocards, and furthermore, you might notice im not the one
who started this post. It seems to have grown off topic a little bit
since all of you morons have your heads stuck up somewhere.

I see, so anyone who actually knows how to build a reliable computer is
a "moron".

snip


--
--
--John
Reply to jclarke at ae tee tee global dot net
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)

hklingon wrote:
Im sure your boss will be kicking himself for making a dumb decision
like that.

You really do have a problem, don't you? And I mean you yourself, not your
supposed issue with AMD chips. You know you really should keep your fingers
out of the thermal paste when applying it to the CPUs.

Dan

hklingon wrote:
Im sure your boss will be kicking himself for making a dumb decision
like that.

Oh, and this is the same boss who also uses only AMD CPUs in all his home
PCs for both himself and his kids. My boss is a complete idiot when it comes
to PCs, so you must really be doing something wrong.

Dan

Sort of 'Don't confuse me with the facts I've made my mind up' attitude to
life? ;-)

Guy


hklingon wrote:
You mean I was supposed to put those little spacers between the case
and the motherboard? DARN! Maybe thats what I was doing wrong. If
your AMD hasnt crashed or died yet, Its about to.


"Bigguy" wrote in message
...
Not my experience at all.....

Last six PCs I built were all AMD CPU and all are extremely
stable....

Maybe you're not to hot at putting them together?

Guy

hklingon wrote:
Well those tests dont really mean anything And the AMD chips are
just plain unstable in any environment. I could take all the dead
(for
some reason or another) AMD chips I have and tile my bathroom floor.
Dont ever build an AMD system for someone whom you dont want calling
you everyday cause it keeps crashing or locking up.


"DaveL" wrote in message
...
You obviously don't know what you are talking about. I'm sure you
were using cheap components like maybe a PC Chips motherboard with
a Via chipset or worse.

Check out this comparison from Anandtech:
http://www.anandtech.com/cpu/showdoc.html?i=1927

It has a Duron beating the celeron like an unwanted stepchild. The
Duron even beats a P4.

Dave


"hklingon" wrote in message
...
Celerons are awesome chips for the price. AMD chips are horribly
unstable IMHO and have lots of heat related problems. Ive had
nothing but problems out of all the Duron computers I've built.
Maybe its cheap components but I havent had good luck finding
boards. Perhaps if AMD made their own motherboards like Intel
does, It might work a little better. If you are into Water/Freon
cooling your system, AMD might give you more performance for your
dollar.
All in All, celeron is my cpu of choice!


"Dark Avenger" wrote in message
om...
Is it me or are there many people with celerons, nice cpu's but
they don't perform!

If you got a celeron and a reasonable graphic card, then already
the graphic card is waiting on that damn slow cpu of yours to
give it the data.

Truly if there is any upgrade worthy for people with a celeron,
then it's firstly of all... the processor! Really even an GF3 is
eating out of it's nose on your cheap ass processor. Get a nice
Pentium 4 processor, or if your motherboard is older a nice P3
processor, why.... cache and speed, the celerons are heavily
limited due to their crapped cache. And Intel processors are
heavily dependant on their cache's.

And really your old GF3 ti 200 or 500 can perform faster and
better.. once it got a CPU wich doesn't makes it eats out of it's
nose but just makes it run full speed.

And if you truly haven't got much money... ah... try to find an
upgrade with a nice motherboard and a DURON processor, yes it's
the budget line of AMD but... their budget line is fast and
powerfull
in performance. Many people swear by durons in their "home media
centers" with a reason, though it has less cache as it's brother,
amd processors don't have asmuch troubles with their cache!

Really get a nice duron system and you'll see you go faster, fork
up a bit more money and get a true XP for the real deal!

Now you have said it yourself. People who use AMD are 'complete idiots'



"Daniel Crichton" wrote in message
. ..
hklingon wrote:
Im sure your boss will be kicking himself for making a dumb decision
like that.

Oh, and this is the same boss who also uses only AMD CPUs in all his home
PCs for both himself and his kids. My boss is a complete idiot when it
comes
to PCs, so you must really be doing something wrong.

Dan

On 4 Jan 2004 03:41:07 -0800, (Dark Avenger) wrote:

Is it me or are there many people with celerons, nice cpu's but they
don't perform!

If they "don't perform" - then how are they nice? Celerons are
slower than P3 CPUs.

And really your old GF3 ti 200 or 500 can perform faster and better..
once it got a CPU wich doesn't makes it eats out of it's nose but just
makes it run full speed.

completely true when it comes to celerons.


--
Remember when real men used Real computers!?
When 512K of video RAM was a lot!

Death to Palladium & WPA!!

On Sun, 4 Jan 2004 13:46:38 -0500, "hklingon"
wrote:

Celerons are awesome chips for the price. AMD chips are horribly unstable
IMHO and have lots of heat related problems. Ive had nothing but problems

Good thing its ONLY your opinion... Because you bought lowend crap
(Intel or AMD - low end crap = crap) and you don't know much about
computers is why you had problems. On my #2 PC, its been on for
weeks withot a reboot on a 1+ year old AMD system, I dont recall its
last crash.

out of all the Duron computers I've built. Maybe its cheap components but I
havent had good luck finding boards.

You said it... CHEAP COMPONENTS... DUH!

Perhaps if AMD made their own
motherboards like Intel does, It might work a little better. If you are

??? In ALL the performance systems, how many of them are INTEL made
boards? Oh yeah.. N O N E!! Yeah, VIA's earler boards had memory
problems... but since the KT133A (3years ago) and NForce - everything
nice and stable.

into Water/Freon cooling your system, AMD might give you more performance
for your dollar. All in All, celeron is my cpu of choice!

When you don't pull BS out of your rear end, you won't look stupid.

Celerons are bought by un-informed computer users WHO didn't know any
better nor the sales prick who sold them the computer... or they JUST
wanted A CHEAP $500 computer from Best Buy... When a $500 AMD would
have smoked it. These typical cheap **** systems tend to inclue
Intel's 845x chipset without an AGP slot... hey, Intel sold a lot with
only SD-RAM PC133 support.

http://www.anandtech.com/cpu/showdoc.html?i=1927&p=14

Hmm... read the whole article... and other posts here... Celerons are
S L O W S H I T.

For unstable? You better tell these companies using AMD CPUs (such
as the I linked to above) for their servers in 2, 4 and 8 way configs.
IBM & SUN are sellings 64bit AMD Servers.

AMD already sold more 64bit CPUs in the past year than intel has in 3
years... And those sales are climbing. And thats for business... not
consumer.



--
Remember when real men used Real computers!?
When 512K of video RAM was a lot!

Death to Palladium & WPA!!

On Sun, 4 Jan 2004 19:49:31 -0500, "hklingon"
wrote:

Well those tests dont really mean anything And the AMD chips are just plain
unstable in any environment. I could take all the dead (for some reason or
another) AMD chips I have and tile my bathroom floor. Dont ever build an AMD
system for someone whom you dont want calling you everyday cause it keeps
crashing or locking up.

Thats because youre a M O R O N... "Those test dont mean anytihng"
obviosuly you know nothing of computers, nor the ability of a site
such as Anandtech which is generally respected by many people. Even
if they are sometimes flawed, you're word has far less value then
anyone elses.

Hmmm... the LAST Intel I built was 2 years ago, my customrs and
friends have all bought AMD. I was building them while I still had my
P3-866.

I built one about 2 years ago for a 65yr old lady, no problems. A
friend, over 3 years ago - His system board had failed a few months
ago- rebuilt his PC with ALL new parts, but still using his original
CPU (AMD 1000) which will go to his 4yr old SON next month.

Crashing? Locking up? Please wash the peanut butter off your
fingers before touching computer parts.


--
Remember when real men used Real computers!?
When 512K of video RAM was a lot!

Death to Palladium & WPA!!

On 4 Jan 2004 18:49:27 -0800, (Dark Avenger) wrote:

Me wrote in message ...
Dark Avenger wrote:

Is it me or are there many people with celerons, nice cpu's but they
don't perform!

Are you really so bored that you can find nothing better to do than
troll? If you'd like to troll in a more lively environment, try posting
that to alt.english.grammar

Hi... well well.. what do we have there. So you hawk on me since I
don't have "perfect" american grammar.

You have neither, so stop complaining. And why I posted it... well as
you see.. already 4 cases of "lower performance due to celerons" have
been around, I guess it's rather basic to say that celerons are crap!
The Old ones where fine overclockers but.... the new ones, ... they
just are to slow!


I guess next... people will be saying "THIS IS BULL **** that the
FX5200 is SLOW!! ".



--
Remember when real men used Real computers!?
When 512K of video RAM was a lot!

Death to Palladium & WPA!!

On Sun, 4 Jan 2004 23:08:24 -0500, "hklingon"
wrote:

You probably run linux or some *ix on those servers because thats the only
way I could ever get an AMD to perform. My claims do not come from a lack of
experience. Ive used AMD's since 5x86 DX4-100 And they worked ok sometimes.

Then its a Windows ISSUE.... I never had problems with AMD, but I
didn't touch them until the AMD1000Mhz came out and memory issues were
sorted out... But the 5x86 were not really usable... their 486 were
clones of the Intel.

I have to say AMD was ahead during the K6-2 Era, Intel didnt have a chip to
compete with its speed really. But when they answered with the Descutes
celeron chips, it felt like a better machine, not to mention its

The K6 were okay LOW cost chips, but their performance was **** for
real work or gaming. They were not close to the Celerons or PII CPUs
even at hundreds of Mhz above the intel (ie: Celeron 333 was faster
than an AMD K62-450~500Mhz) Which shows what little you know about
CPUs. This is general knowlege.

overclocking ability. moving on to 1st generation duron vs. the coppermine,
i built about equal amounts of each and found the flip chips to be less
troublesome. the T-bird was pretty stable and it got very cheap to build as

Durons vs P3/Celerons were kinda even or in AMD's favor.

time went by. I really liked working with the tualatin celeron chips, they
seemed to really outrun everything else in all departments. I built 3 or 4
athlon XP computers and I had either one problem or another from heat to
shotty motherboards, asus and all the ''good" boards included. I have just
found the celerys to be a nice chip. I must confess im not the guy looking
to get 275 fps in quake3 or whatever. but Im glad the new amd's work for
you's guys.

The P3-Ts where very good chips, but Intel couldn't have them compete
with the "ALL KNEW" P4s which were horribly over hyped and actually
quite slow back then.

Heat issues with AMD XP cpus were most likely user error, yours. I've
never had an AMD CPU fail on me. One time I screwed up, but the
system shut down before I knew it and saved the CPU from death.

Perhaps bad batch of boards, dropped who knows.

Unless AMD drops the ball in performance, I'll continue to NOT suport
Intel... competition IS good for everyone. If AMD didn't make a
worthwhile CPU, Today's P4 2000Mhz would cost your $1000+ per chip.

When the P3-800Mhz hit the market, it was $1000... AMD was still new
with their Athlon... I sure was NOT buying the first Athlons because
of crappy boards. It was the same with the PII-400Mhz, it was $1000
when I sold them... The K62-350 was about $300... It was not in the
same class with the true PII/PIII CPUs.

Intel can't PLAY that game anymore.


--
Remember when real men used Real computers!?
When 512K of video RAM was a lot!

Death to Palladium & WPA!!