AMD2500 and Celeron D

AMD2500+ is fast, but it dissipates a lot of heat, consumes a lot of power, and takes a long time, Intel has better performance than AMD.

AMD2500+ is better. Its overclocking performance is even better!

The flash dragon is super faster than C-D, the power consumption is low, and the performance is almost the same as that of the Celeron, and only after the appearance of the buckle sheep is the sheep is not afraid of the dragon.

I wanted to take these 5 points It seems that I don't have to take it Everyone's opinion is the same as mine, but I still have to explain that WOW does not have high requirements for you It mainly depends on the memory and graphics card.

AMD2500 Stronger! And it can be overclocked!

The Celeron D can also be overclocked, and the overclocking ability is not bad. I have a piece of my own. It can directly default to over-to..

However, this is completely bluffing. The frequency is so high. But that performance is still that low.

And that heat is huge. It's literally an oven.

So, if you want to choose between the two, only AMD 2500+ is recommendedDefinitely not recommend Celeron DIf you are unlucky enough to buy Celeron DYou'll regret it after using it.

AMD2500 Race Sample D Series is a lot of big brother.

Although the AMD frequency, but 2500+, this is the same performance as Intel.

I feel that the processor of Ceyan D is okay, after all, the need to use AMD has a lot of investment in the heat dissipation part of the chassis, and the sound is also loud, and in terms of stability, Seyan D's is superior to AMD's, but AMD's speed is indeed undeniable. It depends on what you need. If you are going to play games and seek high speed, then you should choose a better AMD, after all, the speed of 2500+ is not the top now.

It depends on what you're doing, if it's a game, I recommend you buy AMD If it's a simple game of computer cy, it's cheap and the performance is reasonable.

It's up to your own taste! I think if you're playing games. Then you can use AMD's 2500+, but if you are using it for office.

Then you can choose Celeron DOverall, though. These two pieces are about the same.

Because both CPUs have a relatively large amount of heat. It is recommended to choose a good piece of heat dissipation!

It's obviously 2500+.

It's all fundamentally different.

The AMD2500+ is a particularly annoying place, the CPU is too hot and too noisy when running! However, compared to Celeron D, in terms of performance, the AMD 2500+ is a little better.

If it's a game. AMD 2500+ is recommended

Recommend Intel, my brother's home AMD dual-core is not as good as Intel's single-core.

2500 = Celeron D 325 326

2600 = Celeron D 330 331

2800 = Celeron D 335 336

Celeron D is 335 336, as it has been said above.

Celeron D I think you should be saying 340 341, which is equivalent to 3000+

It varies according to the actual application!

2500 is equivalent to the PR value of AMD)! Then the rest of the calculations are up to each individual to comprehend!

The AMD 2500+ 32-bit equivalent of Intel 512K cache.

The AMD2500+ 64-bit equivalent is the Celeron D331

The 2500 of the Sembleon is the equivalent of the Celeron D 320, which seems to be.

If it is Athlon's 2500, it is equivalent to Pentium 4C, and the game is much stronger!

CPU AMD Sempron 2500+ 754-pin 64bit (box).

Interface type: socket 754 Production process frequency: 1400MHz L2 cache: L2 256K FSB frequency: 800MHz

Bibi

100mhz/

What kind of dragon?

It's hard to know for sure if you don't say it.

But look at 2500+? Could it be the most popular S2500+ two years ago, then it is equivalent to CRD331

The AMD3000+ is quite Saiyan.

2500+ Quite a spec!

Mainly look at the external frequency and L2 cache!

Equivalent to ah, AMD's name, how much + is equivalent to how much Intel.

The actual frequency is.

This is basically not comparable, compared to these two alone, the 64-bit Shining Dragon 2500 is better than more than 50%, if it is the P4 era, then the Athlon 2500 is twice as strong, if it is the Patton 2500, it can be compared.

AMD has always been famous for floating-point arithmetic, and games need floating-point arithmetic, so in terms of games, AMD's U has a slight advantage, and if it is in graphics processing, it is Intel's U that has an advantage.

It's not very much... If you have to choose. Just use Intel's. No, in ultra-overclocking...

It's all single-core, right? I'm more of a fan of Intel.

I don't know if you're talking about AMD K7 or K8 core, but you can say that the performance is like this: K7 2500+ "Celeron".

I hope you have the time, the (economic, mental) energy, you can take a look at some hardware magazines ("Microcomputer is recommended").

You don't have to ask anyone else these little questions.