INTEL AND AMD'S SKIRMISH IN THE VALUE PC-PROCESSOR SEGMENT BENEFITS CONSUMERS--AND IT'S

FUN TO WATCH.

The tests are in and the word is out. In the Intel versus Advanced Micro Devices (AMD) low-end
processor competition, AMD has taken the lead. Benchmarked at what AMD claims to be "up to 25
percent" faster in all categories, its Duron processor has been deemed superior to Intel's Celeron by
both the press and industry analysts. But while the big boys (well, the big boy and the underdog
contender) battle it out, the real winner in the value processor skirmish is the consumer.

Intel's Celeron chip, introduced in 1995, has fallen behind. The latest Celeron chips are faster, it's true.
They're now available in 600MHz, 633MHz, and 700MHz speeds, which on the surface seem comparable
to the available Duron chips (offered at 600MHz, 650MHz, and 700Mhz). However, Celeron has grown a
bit long in the tooth--it really is slower than Duron. It is basically the same chip it's been since 1995: a
partially disabled Pentium (it has half the Pentium's L2 cache, 128K, and 32K L1 cache) that some call a
"Celer-mine," due to its common origins with the Coppermine Pentium III. It's more expensive than
Duron, too, with street prices (as of late August) of $109 to $116 for the 600MHz; $141 to $154 for the
633 MHz; and $199 to $250 for the 700Mhz.

What are Celeron's advantages over Duron? Celeron's upgrade path is good. Since the chips fit easily in
existing systems, a new motherboard and chipset are not needed. However, a BIOS upgrade may be
required for certain upgrades. (Contact Intel technical support for specific configurations.) In addition,
there's the Celeron brand-name recognition factor. And finally, Celeron is currently available in brand-
name computers throughout the United States.

What are Duron's advantages over Celeron? For starters, after Intel went proprietary with its
architecture, AMD developed its own architecture and used it in the well-received Athlon, released in
August 1999. Duron, a derivative of Athlon, shares Athlon's architecture and has a total of 192K, full-
speed, on-chip cache (64K L1, 128K L2) versus Celeron's 160K, a 20-percent advantage. Duron runs on
the same 200MHz bus as Athlon, leaving Celeron (at 66MHz) in the dust. It has three (compared to
Celeron's one) floating point …