Richard:
Most of us would never be able to tell the difference in performance between
the two processors. It would only show up if you are doing work that really
leans on the CPU, such as heavy statistical or mathematical analysis,
graphics, CAD, very serious gaming, etc. The only other benefit would be that
you would be able to brag about having the fastest machine around until the
next faster version is released. My advice would be to use the $142.50 to
beef up some other part of your system.

Which reminds me: Athlons run very, very hot, and are very fussy about power
supplies and cooling. Be sure to go to the AMD website (www.amd.com) and
review their current recommendations before you spend any money.
Regards,
Carroll Grigsby

On Friday 19 April 2002 04:37 pm, Richard F. Bolha wrote:
> Hi Dean
>
> Is there really that much improvement on say AMD 1800 for $137.50
> vs a AMD 2100 for $280.00? I know it is sweet for awhile, but I could
> upgrade another unit with the savings. I have limited dollars to
> spend. Other opinions?
>
> Thanks
> Richard Bolha
>
>
> Dean said
>
> I think that the ddr tests five to ten percent faster depending on the
> application. I would not buy ddr to replace 133.
> Some of the high performance motherboards only work with the ddr,
> so if you upgrade to them, you must get ddr.  The dual mb's tend to
> be less high performance.
>
> Dean
>
>               The NOSPIN Group is now offering Free PC Tech
>                      support at our newest website:
>                           http://freepctech.com

              The NOSPIN Group is now offering Free PC Tech
                     support at our newest website:
                          http://freepctech.com