processor comparisons

[Raven]

Are all processors equal in speed, ie. Is a 1.4Ghz P4 equivalent to a 1.4 Celeron/Centrino/Athlon64?

The reason I ask is because I've been shopping around for laptops, and overheard one of the Best Buy reps talking to a customer. He basically said they weren't equivalent, but I didn't catch the details. I always assumed they were equivalent, but figured I should look in to this before I spend a grand on a laptop.

I have a few in mind, one is a 2.2 Athlon 64 (Gateway), 1.3 Celeron (Toshiba), 1.4 Celeron (Gateway), 1.3 Celeron (Gateway), 3.2 P4 (Sony), and a Centrino 715 (Gateway).

I'd probably go with the 2.2 Athlon 64 Gateway, because it offers 1024 RAM, but wanted to get some ideas first.

[JPhillips]

If you have nothing high-end in mind a Celeron will work fine. If you are doing anything processor intensive the Celeron will function at a much lower speed than a Pentium. Even fairly simple apps will tend to run slower on a Celeron of equal chip speed. I ran FOF on a Celeron 1.5 and it was far slower at simming games than my P3 933.

Also, from experience, don't try to do high-end sound file editing on a Celeron.

[vyshka]

Originally Posted by Raven

Are all processors equal in speed, ie. Is a 1.4Ghz P4 equivalent to a 1.4 Celeron/Centrino/Athlon64?

The reason I ask is because I've been shopping around for laptops, and overheard one of the Best Buy reps talking to a customer. He basically said they weren't equivalent, but I didn't catch the details. I always assumed they were equivalent, but figured I should look in to this before I spend a grand on a laptop.

I have a few in mind, one is a 2.2 Athlon 64 (Gateway), 1.3 Celeron (Toshiba), 1.4 Celeron (Gateway), 1.3 Celeron (Gateway), 3.2 P4 (Sony), and a Centrino 715 (Gateway).

I'd probably go with the 2.2 Athlon 64 Gateway, because it offers 1024 RAM, but wanted to get some ideas first.

In short no. You could probably use it to compare Intel chips amongst themselves, but there are many things that go into the actual speed of the processor. The clock speed just dictates how many times a second the chip can do something. Other factors include, the processor architecture (ie # of registers available), cache size, the instruction set, and word size. So for example that 2.2Ghz AMD64 will outperform a 2.2Ghz Pentium.

I believe the Celerons are just Pentium chips that didnt make the grade. I think they have smaller caches than the regular pentiums. Smaller cache means worse performance because it is more likely what is looking for will not be in a cache line and it will have to fetch the data from elsewhere.

Newer Pentiums do have one thing that the AMD chips lack, which is a hyperthreaded core. It is similar to having 2 processors (not the same and not quite as efficient).

At the moment I believe most things out there do not take advantage of the features available in the X86-64 chips (AMD64), but they are 32bit compatible which is what has sunk the IA-64 stuff and forced Intel to follow AMD with 64bit X86 chips.

[PilotMan]

Laymans terms:

AMD products are comparable to Intel products, however they operate on lower frequecies. That does not mean they are slower, in fact the AMD chip is faster when the frequencies are equal. Example my 1.67 Sempron might be equal to a 2.0 Celeron. That is AMD v. Intel.

Within Intel and AMD you have higher and lower quality processors. For Intel, they started making Celeron as a cheaper, more cost effective way for Joe Family to get a home computer. The processor runs slower for the same clock speed, and generally has less cache. Personally, I dislike Celeron's. The Pentium is your high end number cruncher from Intel. AMD has its off brand too. Sempron or Duron(?) of old, while the Athlon chip is the higher, better performing chip ( I think, but I could be wrong).

Centrino is another thing. A new technology, used in laptops to help the chips run cooler, and without using as much energy to prolong battery life. You can get centrino technology with Celeron or P4 chipsets. The clock speed is not comparable to any. For example, my new P4 Centrino 1.6ghz processor gets 5hrs battery life, and is comparable to a standard 2.3 ghz P4 chip that may only have 2.5hrs battery life in a laptop.

I have a few in mind, one is a 2.2 Athlon 64 (Gateway), 1.3 Celeron (Toshiba), 1.4 Celeron (Gateway), 1.3 Celeron (Gateway), 3.2 P4 (Sony), and a Centrino 715 (Gateway).

All other things being equal, the 3.2 P4 is probably the fastest and will behave most like a desktop replacement followed by the 2.2 Athlon. The lower speed Celeron's that you have listed probably all have Centrino technology and would likely have longer battery life, but at a performance cost, plus you have the Celeron chip instead of the P4 chip in those. The Gateway Centrino 715 is just the Intel chipset used with the board. Not sure what processor speed, but I would guess that it is 1.3-1.5. Mine is the 725 chipset and is a 1.6 although it is also sold with 1.5's.

[Raven]

Thanks, guys. Very helpful.

I think i'll probably buy this one, unless one of you guys know of a better alternative or know a good reason for me not to get it. It's a significant chunk of change, so any feedback would be appreciated.

[Daimyo]

Really depends on what you want to use it for... if its just a desktop replacement the P4 is good. However, if you want to take it with you everywhere the P4 will be heavier, have shorter battery life, and run hotter... in that case you'd be much better off with a Pentium M or the Centrino.