Celeron M 440 (1.86 GHz) or Coro Solo (1.2 GHz)

Hi, I am sure this makes sense to most people, not to me, apparently.

Between these two which should I pick, considering that the top priority is light weight, and no gaming interest. This should be a durable, working and traveling laptop, mostly for MW and online research use.

The contenders:

Sony Vaio SZ440 and Fujitsu LifeBook P7230 or B6210

Thanks for your help!

 

The speed of both CPUs is about the same. Both will work for your needs but wont be comparable to dual core performance. I am not sure which uses more power. Make sure you get an XP laptop because I cant run Vista smoothly on my Pentium M 1.6ghz so you might run into problems with these setups.

 

The core (as in core solo) architecture is two generations beyond the celeron. I would pick the Core Solo over a celeron any day. Both processors will do what you need them to do, ive just had bad experiences with celerons!

 

The Core Solo is based off the much newer Core architecture. Although it's not dual core, I would still prefer it over the Celeron, which is widely stigmatized as a budget low-end processor, whereas the Core Solo is known more of a specialized ultraportable processor.

By the way, izabella, if you're considering the Sony TX, you should also think about buying the 11.1" Asus U1F. It's cheaper than the Sony, and it comes with the Core Duo U2400 (1.2 Ghz), which is a dual core processor that handily and happily outperforms the Celeron and the Core Solo.

 

Congratulations to the above three posts for being completely and utterly innacurate in every respect.

I am tempted to delete them.

1. The Celeron-M 440 along with the rest of the -400 series is based on the Yonah Core, as is the Core (1) Duo and Core Solo. The differences between Core Solos and Celeron-M 400s are:

a. The Celeron-M 400 series has half the level 2 cache, 1MB vs 2MB.

b. The Celeron-M lacks speedstepping. This feature allows the cpu to throttle down it's clock speed (and in the new Santa Rosa platform FSB speed too - this does not apply here) to reduce heat output and save battery life.

So, in terms of architecture there is no difference. The Core is no farther ahead, just has more features.

2. The power of these 2 cpus is most certainly not the same. Bieng based on a Core, the Celeron-M is the most powerful single Core cpu beneath the Core Solo currently available. It benchmarks higher than single Core Turions clock for clock. Therefore the 1.86Ghz Celeron-M 440 will anihilate the 1.2GHz Core Solo in benchmarks.

The recommendation for the Core Solo is probably right but for the wrong reasons. For a travelling notebook the low voltage of the Core Solo LV and speedstepping ability will make it infinitely more friendly on the battery life of your laptop. However if you intend to be running cpu intensive tasks like encoding etc. The Celeron would be far better. For general use the Core Solo wins out.