P3 vs. Duron!!!
 

ok, i want to know which is better... the p3 ( 800Mhz ) or the amd Duron ( 800Mhz )? Now don't just say " DURON RULES " or " P3 ownnnzzzz j000!!! " i need some resons, why which is better than the other.

Go look at some benchmarks, that is the best way to check up on it.
www.tomshardware.com www.sharkyextreme.com www.firingsquad.com

------------------
Drat911@Nwez.com *Welcome to Phalanx!*

there is no real saying if p3 is better than duron on thoes sites... they just test them sepratly and never give a " P3 is better the duron " statment

It all depends what you want to do with it. If you want lots of power out of the box and are uncomfortable overclocking and tweaking, go P3. It DOES bench out faster than Durons out of the box. If you are experienced and want something you can tweak and overclock, not to mention something which does not rape your wallet, go Duron. There is never really a "better" with CPUs, it's only "better for what you use it for".

This is an unfair comparison. Remember, the Duron is like 1/8th the price of the PIII, and benchmark wise it will be lower (but on some benchmarks where programs fit into L2 cache on the Duron, the Duron can beat out a PIII equivalently clocked) than a PIII, but it's NOT a fair comparison. It's just slightly better than comparing an Athlon 750 with a Celeron 733. The Duron was meant to compete with the Celeron, not the PIII.

That being said, the Duron is IMO better because of price.

If you're looking for a XXX processor is better because of YYY, then I doubt you'll find it. Anyone here could tell you that. You actually have to read the review sites to get an idea of the pros/cons of each processor.

As for a good comparison, take a look <a href="http://www.anandtech.com/showdoc.html?i=1336&p=1" target="_NEW">here</a> for a comparison between the Athlon, the PIII, and the Duron. The Duron comes just short of the PIII on a couple of the benchmarks, but it does beat it on one or two (mainly Spec, and that's 'cuz the Duron is an Athlon with 64Kb less L2 cache).

------------------
Chris Shepherd
[This message has been edited by chsh (edited 03-12-2001).]

kiddo, he asked the question he got an answer. . .noone ever asked for it to be fair here.

it is a given the PIII is faster than a duron, nothing wrong with that. The PIII is a few hundred dollars more, again nothing wrong with that. just because they aren't in the same price category doesn't mean that they can't be compared to eachother.

------------------
©××××ק===============
»»»»»»»»Cryonosis«««««««««
©××××ק===============
moderator for Broken Pixel http://www.brokenpixel.com
webmaster of the Kingdom of Ys http://cryonosis.8m.com

Very true, but I was pointing out that any benchmark between the two would be an overly unfair comparison. It would not take into account other things, such as the fact that you can pick up a PIII clocked at 1GHz, and a Duron at most at 800 MHz. Benchmarks also tend to ignore cost of the processor and its mainboards.
I was also basing what I said on what SmokeU had said:
That, to me, indicates he is looking for an X is better than Y comparison. However, because better is a subjective thing, I took it to mean 'Price-, Performance-, and Availability- (in various clock speeds) wise, is the P3 or the Duron better?'.

Essentially, I see it as being unfair in different ways for each processor, and thought it was a bad comparison at best.


------------------
Chris Shepherd