Athlon or Duron??

[hugh69]

sorry you have probly seen this so many times. but just wondering, got about £80 to spend what would be better the thunderbird 700 or a duron 900???

[MDD1963]

Originally posted by hugh69:
<STRONG>sorry you have probly seen this so many times. but just wondering, got about £80 to spend what would be better the thunderbird 700 or a duron 900???</STRONG>

The Duron 900 will outperform it with sheer clock speed advantage, but I'd instead save up another $20-$30 or so for a 900 T-Bird!

[Russ192]

I agree. Go for a TBird if you can, I would! Not to say im not fond of my little durons! As your UK, www.pcindex.co.uk (http://www.pcindex.co.uk) should find you a good price.

[Cygnus]

I would go for the T-Bird myself. I would rather have the added L2 cache the T-Bird has than more MHz on the Duron. I've run both and the T-Bird operates better IMHO.

[Geek #1]

I would go for the Thunderbird with it being an all round better chip. I have found that actual clock speed does not make that much difference unless it is 20/30% higher. Having more Ram or a faster Video card will produce the same effect.

Having more cache on the chip (ie. thunderbird) will serve you better in the long run.

[AlienDyne]

I'd get the t-bird!

[King Grover]

Athlon. Duron is weak. that is all

[Twisted_Mister]

I am a Thunderbird guy myself, and since we are looking at 20 - 30 difference in price, drop the extra cash - it will pay off in the long run. The Duron is slower than the Thunderbird, plain and simple.