What's the real difference between chips?

[judder]

I'm not a computer whizz so please be gentle. I am looking to learn and build myself a computer (preferably with a small form factor). My research seems to suggest that Intel chips are always more expensive (sometimes considerably so) than their AMD equivalents. Are they worth the extra money?

Is there really much difference (in every day use i.e. not for serious gaming) between a Celeron, Pentium and Core-Duo (or whatever they are called) and all their subcategories?

Finally, what chip should I get (I realise this could spark as many different answers as people who take the time to offer an answer), given that the computer will be used for writing documents, spreadsheets, databases, internat and occasionally running some Fortran programs under a Linux partition?

Thanks.

 

[mk17]

It varies by the demand you intend to place on your system, but I'd say Intel Core 2 Duo E6300 or E4300 would be your best bet.

 

[judder]

Thanks for that. Though I have a 2 year old laptop running a 2.4 GHz Celeron with 512 Mb RAM. Would these Core 2 Duo chips result in a slower machine than my laptop?

 

[PlasmaZombies]

Thanks for that. Though I have a 2 year old laptop running a 2.4 GHz Celeron with 512 Mb RAM. Would these Core 2 Duo chips result in a slower machine than my laptop?

Core 2 Duos are up to 40% quicker than there P4 counterparts. So, I would think you would see a much bigger increase in performance versus a celeron.

 

[Raikiri]

We really need a big message as you enter the CPU section saying 'The GHZ means bugger all!'

They aren't even comparable, the 1.8ghz C2D will be over twice as fast in single core apps and 4x as fast in properly multithreaded apps

 

[bfar]

Pretty much any cpu available at OCUK will destroy your old celeron. Decide on a budget and ask for a spec in the 'General Hardware' thread. That will get you started.

If you're not a gamer or power user, than C2D or a high end X2 would probably be overkill atm. You don't need a Ferrari to drive on small roads....

 

[WJA96]

I'm not a computer whizz so please be gentle. I am looking to learn and build myself a computer (preferably with a small form factor). My research seems to suggest that Intel chips are always more expensive (sometimes considerably so) than their AMD equivalents. Are they worth the extra money?

Hi, the two companies and their ranges are very different in many ways. AMD were the enthusiasts choice until about 6 months ago. The Intel processors were very expensive and, although they had their good points, they basically were not as fast as the AMD Athlon 64 processors, especially for games - an area that is vitally important for the enthusiast market. In January 2006 there were rumours that Intel was preparing a new super-processor. This became Conroe and then Core2Duo and they turned out to be superb processors. The current Intel £150 processor (E6400) will outperform the top AMD processor (which is almost 3 times the price) in most benchmarks. In addition to be massively fast at their stock speeds it was very quickly discovered that most of them will run much quicker than they are supposed to by overclocking them. In response, AMD slashed the prices of their
processors which makes the Intel chips look expensive on paper, but in practice it's just AMD showing their desperation to sell processors.

Is there really much difference (in every day use i.e. not for serious gaming) between a Celeron, Pentium and Core-Duo (or whatever they are called) and all their subcategories?

Yes. A Celeron is substantially slower than a Pentium 4 which in turn is substantially slower than a Core2Duo. You would be able to feel the difference in day-to-day use. The difference between a good Athlon 64 and a Core2Duo would be much less noticeable, but it would be very clear in benchmarks.

Finally, what chip should I get (I realise this could spark as many different answers as people who take the time to offer an answer), given that the computer will be used for writing documents, spreadsheets, databases, internat and occasionally running some Fortran programs under a Linux partition?

None of what you have described as your projected use could be described as massively processor intensive. A good hard-disk subsystem and plenty of RAM is probably more important than a fast processor. The current Core2Duo small form factor systems are very high end and very expensive and without a budget it is very difficult to suggest something for you. I have no doubt that an AMD system with good hard disks would give you good performance, but if you're spending a few hundred pounds it seems crazy to skimp on a good CPU.

 

[Indy500]

If your budget is £300 or less for the whole system, I'd stick with a socket AM2 Sempron for processor. Incredibly cool running (I've never seen their fan need to spin up during normal use), cheap, and still faster than that Celeron you have now.