Should I go with Celeron?

[pixel]

slightly old topic but! in tests done at tomshardware.com they simply advocate

for video encoding

that mhz are king. SO the faster the mhz the quicker the encode, above memeory above disk speed. However I think the celeron is a bad buy compared to the athlon xp which is a "full" processor and useful for many other things besides video encoding.

Well, as you decided to drag this topic up, here is a post also concerning this: https://www.videohelp.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=638967#638967

As you said, the MHz is all that matters, but for general tasks a Celeron can not touch a P4.

The person concerned in this was wanting a seperate PC for vid encoding, which is the best option as it is cheap to buy a celeron, mobo and case etc.

[pixel]

Sorry RabidDog, didn't read your full post.

Yes, a cheap AMD Athlon is definitely better than a Celeron, plus it can do so much more.

I personally would not use AMDs at all, it is P4 for me.

Just a note, remember the Celeron would be better for basically nothing more than encoding. It isn't really any use for doing real-time mpeg2 capture or anything else really intensive.