AMD's Duron Birthed

maniack writes "The AMD Duron, the "Celeron-killer", has finally been released and lives up to the hype. According to these reviews from Ace's Hardware, Gamer's depot, Anandtech, and Tom's Hardware, the Duron thrashes the Celeron clock for clock and even hangs with the P3 in a lot of the benchmarks. Looks like AMD has another winner in the value market to go along with the Athlon."

Comments

I want two...

[FascDot Killed My Pr]

I want to get a dual AMD system just so I can say it's a "Duron Duron".
--
Compaq dropping MAILWorks?

Bad name

[Nadir]

The word "Duro" in Italian means "Hard"... AMD's marketing should have done a bit more research on meanings... I formally give AMD an "X-Rating" :-)

--
The world is divided in two categories:
those with a loaded gun and those who dig. You dig.

There is also a review on Sharky Extreme

[thue]

http://www.sharkyextre me.com/hardware/reviews/cpu/duron_700/

what are you talking about?

[Hollins]

AMD had compatibility issues through the K6 release, but I haven't heard of any starting with K6/2. I've been running countless applications and games on K6/2, K6/3 and Athlon processors for quite some time and have yet to encounter a single 'compatibility problem'. The AMDs have proven to be nothing but a better value than Intel's offerings time and time again.

Frankly, the only people I have encountered to bring up 'compatibility problems' are uneducated intel loyalists who have never put an AMD into one of their boxes.

Can you provide a URL to an article that discusses these 'compatibility problems'?

Benchmarks only measure speed

[fiziko]

Most people are only concerned with speed in their benchmarks. I switched from Intel to AMD a few years ago, for cost reasons. I started running physical simulations of wave propogations for class and lo! what do I find? The P2-300 and K6-2 300 chips produced different results! They were close, but not the same. (For those who understand this: I was using a fourth order Runge-Kutta integration with initial conditions that used a lot of exponentials.) The AMD chips actually produced more stable results: roundoff errors were more accurate more of the time! The results also came through substantially faster, but I don't know how much of that was processor, and how much was two different levels of overhead. (The school's machines were on a network, mine weren't. Both were RedHat 5.1.)

Bottom line: AMD produced better numbers, and it produced them faster. I have yet to see an official benchmark that looked at accuracy, but maybe they should.