Jump to content

Celeron 420 vs Orleans 3200


ripken204
 Share

Recommended Posts

i cant find any info on how these two cpus compare. i would have to guess that the celeron is a faster cpu but i have no proof of that.

the cpu will be used in a webserver, primarily for php+mysql work. so if one is better at that type of thing then let me know.

Edited by ripken204
Link to comment
Share on other sites


I honestly can't say much about the Windsor CPUs, but the E2100 series isn't that much more expensive than the 420, and you'll get more cache and a second core to boot. Are you trying to go for an ultra-ultra cheap setup for web-development?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It seems ripken204 is going to rent a server so they gave him some options.

If we compare both CPUs, then the AMD will win. Remember that at stock speeds AMD still is the best solution for its price when you don’t look at power usage.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If we compare both CPUs, then the AMD will win.

From what I can tell, the Windsor is a dual-core CPU, meaning it can handle better concurrent requests than the single-core Celeron. Ultimately, if you're going for web-hosting, the main concern is how much load they put on their servers rather than the specific hardware. The Celeron 420 with a single user will be much faster than the AMD with 100 users (obviously). ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

well that's what they told me, they first told me it as an athlon64 3000 and i asked what core it was, they said windsor.. they do have some X2's also that is prolly where they got that from..

the amd is $5 more per month. im going to be getting a cheap dedicated server.

do any of you have some good recommendations on hosts?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If that's the only difference, I'd go for the cheaper of the two. The main question again comes down to load. With a low-traffic site, you won't notice any major difference in a properly setup website between the two servers. I'm assuming that we're going to be dealing with fairly "standard" web services here, and nothing where a single request would require a large amount of resources.

Go for the cheaper - if you're finding that you're lacking on speed, then you can deal with something else.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On the other paw, if the 'cheap server' is really cheap, you can expect bottom-of-the-line network and disk interfaces. Usually that means that most of the functionality of those interfaces is handled at the os/driver level instead of in hardware.

So in this instance, a dual-core will potentially go a long ways toward taking care of driver-related OS stalls.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...