AMD Mobile Sempron3100+(1.8GHz)  VS  Celeron M 370 (1.50GHz)?
450312
sempron has a bigger cache, typically for gamers and hard core pc users.\nceleron is for office related kind of stuff.
10326
First up, Intel.  The Intel Celeron or Celeron M on laptops is the slowest processor you can get.  Despite its speed of 1.4GHz+ it has less L1 and L2 cache of the Pentium D or Pentium 4.\n\nThe Pentium D or Pentium 4 for desktops are some of the fastest processors you can find, I said some, they are not THE fastest you can get.\n\nNow AMD, the AMD Sempron is the lowest end AMD processor you can buy.  It is faster than a comparable Intel Celeron chip but it is not as fast as a Pentium 4 or D, again due to its limited L1/L2 cache size.\n\nThe fastest processors you can buy are AMD Athlon 64 or Athlon 64x2 processors.  Especially for high-end multi-media and gaming applications.  The AMD Athlon 64x2's are dual core processors which can run two processes at the same time independent of each other.  It's like having two processors on one chip.  These are THE fastest you can buy.  But you will not find the x2 chips on laptops only the AMD Athlon 64, Sempron or Turion (their version of a mobile chip).\n\nSpeed is not only dictated by processor clock speed, it also depends on the amount of memory it has and whether or not it has a dedicated or shared memory graphics card.  Generally 512MB of memory is good, 1GB of memory is all the better.  A dedicated graphics card in a laptop has its own memory and does not share it with the main memory or ram.  A shared memory video card will take between 32MB and 128MB of main memory to use as video memory, clearly this does nothing to improve performance.\n\nIf you can get a laptop with an AMD Athlon 64 3200+ or better and a dedicated video card and 512MB or 1GB of memory.  You won't be dissapointed.\n\nSome are saying that clock speed is the most important, I assure you that is not the case.  Clock speed tells you how much raw power the processor has but does nothing to tell you how much "work" it can do in one clock cycle.  For exmaple an AMD Athlon 64 3000+ can do more "work" per clock cycle than a faster Pentium 4 at 3.0GHz even though the Athlon operates in the area of 2.2GHz, this is due to the fact it has a larger cache and a better architecture but that is going way beyond the question you asked and might end up confusing someone.\n\nFor a comparison of 77 processors see Tomshardware below.\n\nHope this helped.
710631
I have 2 Dell core duo laptops that I want to sell off right now. \n\nOne is 1.66GHz and the other is 1.83GHz, they both have 1GB RAM. Honestly, you may not be able to notice the difference in speeds. And the difference in prices of those 2 that I'm selling is $40.\n\nSo if that 40 bucks is not much to some people, they will go for the 1.83GHz, but personally, the 1.66GHz will do just fine to me.
913190
Guys.. there is nothing like best... it all depends upon 'your objective' ie your requirements decide the best. Intel offers CPUs in two brands - pentium and celeron. if you've more money, then you could go for pentium. celeron is low-cost processor and it does effective than pentium. Another one is AMD's Athlon its all so cheap and faster. My opinion falls on Athlon.
695411
there was a point of time, not more than a few months ago where amd single core processors were much better than their intel counterparts, for instance an amd 3800 could beat an intel 3.2 ghz hands down, ps they were cheaper. but since the advent of intel core2 duo, intel has regained the market. core2 duo's are much cheaper than amd dual core's and much better in performance. if you are looking for single core processors, then amd still is better than intel single cores. dont even think about a celeron, they shouldnt be mentioned over here.\nlol
465445
Pentium M is for Mobile gadgets, it's intended for laptops notebooks, etc. Never use it for a desktop computer. Or if you want to make a light traffic print server, Celeron would make a nicer deal, M is way too powerful and way too expensive for things like that.
756496
1.6 ghz AMD turion 64 X2 has two 1.6 processors inside. Dual core processors handle multi-tasking better if you're running mulitiple programs on a Pentium 4 it's going to slow down. If you run it on the dual core processor it will run smoothly. \n\nRunning one program at time 2.4 P4 processor would beat 1.6 dual core. 1.6 is kinda slow I have 1.83 core duo processor. I paid $1200 for my 15.4" labtop. Now there are core 2 duos which are faster than the core duo so I recommend getting a labtop with a core 2 duo or at least what I have because it's pretty quick.
394166
If you can tolerate 1.13 GHz lieu of 1.4GHz, they are going for about 20 bucks on Ebay. I am pretty sure your current processor is a "Slot 1", but if i'm wrong, then you have a "socket 370". You'll need to know this for sure before you buy a P3 replacement.
792140
There is a big difference in the architecture of both CPUs. An AMD CPU has an integrated memory controller. This serves as a link between the CPU and the memory (RAM). Intel CPUs do not have this, so it relies on another chip to serve as the link with the memory. This saves up space on the CPU, so Intel decided to increase the cache size on their CPUs.\nMore details.\nBecause AMD has the integrated mem controller, it performs faster than an Intel CPU with same clock speed. You have to know that it is not the CPU clock speed that matters, but the FSB clock speed. So if you need a 'fast computer' you need a lot of memory (RAM) and a high FSB.
583794
There is the P4 which has many different versions such as the Pentium M (mobile cpu - centrino), the core duo, the Xeon, the standard P4 which ranges from a 400mhz bus to an 800mhz bus, and then the Pentium D which is the dual core CPU.\n\nThe very top chip I think they have on the market right now is the Intel Pentium Extreme Edition which is a dual core chip with 2x2mb of cache and a 1024 bus.\n\nAs for the AMD, there is the sempron which is AMD's answer to the celeron (but better IMHO) and then the Athlon 64, which is a pretty awesome chip, but not as awesome as the AMD Athlon 64 X2 which is the dual core version of the AMD line.  The opteron is the name of AMD's server chip line, and they do come in both single and dual core.  Then, of course, is the Turion CPU which is the mobile chip.\n\nI like both chips, I usually sell more AMD than INTEL chips.  You can pick up a dual core AMD Athlon 3800+ X2 for around $300 and it runs sweet when paired up with a gig or two of RAM.\n\nHope this helps!
1118631
The Sempron can be upgraded to a Turion as they both use the socket 754 interface, if you do want to upgrade ur sempron to  ML37, its not such a wise upgrade as the sempron ALSO has support for 64 bit OSes, and if its for the clock speed increase, AMD processors are NOT meant to be upgraded for the clock speed!!, alternatively, y dont you sell your notebook and get a notebook with a Turion 64 X2, it's a dual core processor and runs on a brand new interface ie socket 638 which includes support for DDR2  RAM upto 800 MHz!!!\nthese notebooks are not out as yet, so u gotta wait for a few days, but its WORTH A WAIT!!!!\ntill then use the sempron, n trust me i made the same mistake as you and upgraded my Mobile Athlon 64 3000+ to a Turion ML40, but i realised that it isnt worth it at all!!!
932648
core 2 duo 1.86 GHz ia better dear. if u want full desktop then Compaq offers u the same at 37,000 rupees. i am using the same.
39341
celeron M 370 is slow
968847
1 MB L2 Cache would be v.good. if you want more then 2 MB would be great. But what you need to watch out for more than the cache is not getting a celeron processor because it would be slow. Also you should care about the bus speed of the processor and the motherboard.
295519
There are a lots of difference between the other processor's cache and celeron's cache. It's less performing and small in size. Celeron has less Cache so that they can sell processors in cheap price. And most of all the processors with small cache size are focused to serve any special purpose. But for multipurpose computers it isn't a good thing to have less cache and all levels. More information can be found in the processor's manufacturer's web site.
555421
Both are made by Intel - I don't personally see any real difference in performance from the type of chip (either Celeron or Pentium).\n\nWhat you really need to know is the clockspeed, not the chip name.\n\nThe PC you buy should reflect what purpose it will be used for. If it's just word documents etc, you only need an entry level PC, but for high powered graphics editing, serious gaming etc, you'll want a higher spec one.\n\nPCs on the market today are getting to the 4GHz mark (that's 4 GigaHertz) for the really high spec models.\n\nDepending on what you want to buy, you need to understand that the higher the clockspeed, the faster the PC will be.\n\nAdditionally, you should check out how much RAM it has. For docs, you can go for 128/256 MB RAM, but higher spec PCs are getting produced with upwards of 1024 MB\n\nHard disk size is merely to do with the amount of data you will store on it. Standard is 80GB last time I checked, but there are PCs out there with 250GB etc. As with the above, it's all to do with requirement and bigger is better. Remember with this though that text takes up less space than graphics.\n\nHope this helps.
820877
If it is 600MHz vs. 1.3GHz, then the 1.3Ghz is faster.  1GHz = 1000MHz.  You should know that both of those processors are really really old and out of date.