Page 4
Budget System Comparison
By Douglas Helmer
Round 2: 3DMark 2000 v. 1.1:
3DMark 2000 is MadOnion's flagship benchmarking product. 3DMark tests a system's 3D gaming performance. Scores are not compared with an original control system per se, but with thousands of other users with similar systems. Results can be stored and compared through MadOnion's massive on-line database.
Our Results (numerous iterations):
(AMD Duron)
(Intel Celeron)
Interpretation: What our 3DMark 2000 benchmarks show, basically, is that the Monsoon (AMD Duron) system kicks the Tsunami (Intel Celeron) system's butt. In simple arithmetic, the AMD Duron is half-again as fast as the Intel Celeron . . 1. and for fewer bucks! Why is the AMD so blazingly fast? Well, it has to do with the on-die cache, the Front Side Bus (FSB) speed, and the motherboard. In all respects the Monsoon's (AMD Duron) structure and implementation of these three factors: cache, FSB, and mobo with built-in ATA 100 HD controller, is superior to the Tsunami (Intel Celeron) system's setup.
Technically speaking, the AMD Duron core has more usable L1 L2 cache (192 KB total) on the processor than does the Intel Celeron which only has 128 KB total usable [the first 32 KB of the L1 cache is actually mirrored on the L2 cache so it isn't added into the total usable])---and we all know that processor cache is faster and better than RAM, right? Also, the AMD Duron has a 200 MHz FSB whereas the Intel Celeron only has a 66 MHz FSB speed. To quote the vendor, the AMD Duron simply "slaughters" the Intel Celeron. And again, it's less expensive.
