Semprons!!!

[niLeGreatFun]

Just wondering if anyone is yet to hear about the new line of AMD's processors??

Just leave feedback ..... THANKS!! :thumbs:

 

[Shamrock]

Not good. The XP's are better. Also the AMD 64 is better.

 

[niLeGreatFun]

XP is not better semprons are simply renamed XP's for example a 2800+ sempron would run similarly to a XP2800.

On the other hand the sempron 3100+ is an Athlon 64 (minus the 64 bit support0

am i not right?

 

[Kyorisu]

IIRC Semprons are the new budget cpu. They are replacing the old Duron set of budget Cpus. Xp's to my knowledge are faster. If semprons where renamed XPs. The XP series would be dropped. However this isn't the case.

I'll do some googling.

Read this http://www.quepublishing.com/articles/article.asp?p=347271&seqNum=2

To hold down cost and improve yield, Model 8 Semprons are not based on the latest Athlon XP design, Barton, but rather on the older Thunderbird-B core. Compared to Barton, Thunderbird-B runs cooler and offers a smaller die size, thanks in large part to its smaller L2 cache size (256KB), versus 512KB for Barton. Although Sempron has only half the L2 cache of Athlon XP Bartons, Sempron's 256KB L2 cache is four times the size of the L2 cache in Duron. Thanks to a larger cache and faster clock speeds, Socket A Semprons run much faster than Durons.

The Socket 754 Sempron, officially known as AMD Sempron, enables you to move into Socket 754 computing at a strictly 32-bit level. This offshoot of the Socket 754 Athlon 64 Newcastle drops support for 64-bit operating systems, but offers high-performance memory support and ECC error correction with its built-in memory controller. The major features of the initial AMD Sempron version (code-named Paris) include:

 

[niLeGreatFun]

ok cheers m8

 

[Kyorisu]

Sempron 3000 beats the crap out of my duron 1.3ghz. Gah 1 and 1/2 hours until my new Athlon 3000 xp barton.

 

[Shamrock]

I have an AMD 64 3200+ Socket 939..

 

[`unreal]

yea semprons for the socket A are the later duron-class processors, so the socket A XP Barton cores are much faster.

BUT the sempron for socket 754 is ok, but its non-64 bit BUT its VERRRRYY overclockable.

 

[blahblahblah]

For budget CPU's, I recommend Sempron's right now. They are simply cheaper than finding the last remaining Athlon XP's (they have been discontinued). To put performance in comparision, a Sempron CPU performs about one notch slower than a Athlon XP. For instance, a Sempron 2800+ performs a little bit faster than a Athlon XP 2600+.

If you can find an Athlon XP for cheaper get that, but the fact remains that the Athlon XP line has been discontinued. I don't think it is worth the additional premium to find and buy an Athlon XP over a Sempron.

Personally, I'm not a big fan of the Semprons primarily because that it takes a step back performance wise for consumers. However, a Sempron is simply better than an Intel Celeron D. Because of that, that is why I recommend it for a budget computer.

XP is not better semprons are simply renamed XP's for example a 2800+ sempron would run similarly to a XP2800.

On the other hand the sempron 3100+ is an Athlon 64 (minus the 64 bit support0

am i not right?

You are wrong, AMD does its processor naming scheme kind of retarded. The Athlon XP line was based upon the performance of one given Intel Pentium 4 processor (I forget the actual speed). AMD then has a new processor speed and determine how much faster that processor is over the benchmark processor and then gives it an appropriate name. IIRC, the Sempron processor uses a Celeron D as its beginning benchmark. Therefore all Semprons speed ratings are based upon a Celeron D. However, the Sempron's are still faster than a Celeron D.

On a side note, Celeron D's are a world of improvement over the older Celeron's. Not enough to recommend them, but enough where I wouldn't be terribly ashamed if I had one. The only thing keeping back the Celeron D is price. A Celeron D is more expensive than a Sempron.

 

[goss]

XP is not better semprons are simply renamed XP's for example a 2800+ sempron would run similarly to a XP2800

Mate XP'S are better because if a XP 3000+ was against a Sempron 3000+ the XP 3000+ would win. Although the Sempron wouldn't run too far behind it.

I don't think many people know much about semprons because not many people have them, But i'm sure it will be fine for you Duggan :cheers:

On the other hand the sempron 3100+ is an Athlon 64 (minus the 64 bit support) Am i not right?

No you are not right there. It cannot be the same as an athlon 64 bit minus the 64 bit support otherwise it would be an athlon only. LOL. Athlon 64 bit 3000+ runs shit loads faster that an Athlon XP 3000+ from what i'v read and been told. It also has a better tweaked core clock. Also since the 64 bit support is running on win 32 bit, It runs way faster. << FACT. If you can mate, try and save up for the 64 bit once you get a new graphics card. Even though sempron 3000+ may be fine, the Athlon 64 bit 3000+ are getting real cheap. Also if you got one you would be set for the future. BRING ON WINDOWS XP 64 BIT
goss

 

[[w0f]Oblivion]

Mate XP'S are better because if a XP 3000+ was against a Sempron 3000+ the XP 3000+ would win. Although the Sempron wouldn't run too far behind it.

I don't think many people know much about semprons because not many people have them, But i'm sure it will be fine for you Duggan :cheers:



No you are not right there. It cannot be the same as an athlon 64 bit minus the 64 bit support otherwise it would be an athlon only. LOL. Athlon 64 bit 3000+ runs shit loads faster that an Athlon XP 3000+ from what i'v read and been told. It also has a better tweaked core clock. Also since the 64 bit support is running on win 32 bit, It runs way faster. << FACT. If you can mate, try and save up for the 64 bit once you get a new graphics card. Even though sempron 3000+ may be fine, the Athlon 64 bit 3000+ are getting real cheap. Also if you got one you would be set for the future. BRING ON WINDOWS XP 64 BIT
goss

you really have no idea what your talking about do you??
Sempron are basically amd64bit chips without 64bit support

Amd 64's Do not run faster than xp's Because they are 64bit, They only benifit from 64bit when your running a 64bit program, Otherwise it doesnt do jack. the reason the amd64bit processor (in this case the clawhammer and newcastle core, socket 754 and 939 ) correct me if im wrong on the names/sockets heh
but if you took 64bit from a amd64bit processor today, and you were still running only 32bit programs, it would act EXACTLY the same, No performance loss whatsoever. Oh and amd64's are also MUCH better than xp's because they have HTT (hyper transport technology) Which eliminates the FSB, Which the sempron 3100+ Has, Just minus the 64bit support, and they run on an older core, thus making it Older, Not 'top of the line' and cheaper to Maintain.
of cource this brings the problem of it not bieng "future proof" as wel, aka no windows64bit, there you are correct.
keep in mind semprons 3100+ and above are the socket 754 chips, anything under is like a wounded xp.

 

[goss]

you really have no idea what your talking about do you??
Sempron are basically amd64bit chips without 64bit support

Amd 64's Do not run faster than xp's Because they are 64bit, They only benifit from 64bit when your running a 64bit program, Otherwise it doesnt do jack. the reason the amd64bit processor (in this case the clawhammer and newcastle core, socket 754 and 939 ) correct me if im wrong on the names/sockets heh
but if you took 64bit from a amd64bit processor today, and you were still running only 32bit programs, it would act EXACTLY the same, No performance loss whatsoever. Oh and amd64's are also MUCH better than xp's because they have HTT (hyper transport technology) Which eliminates the FSB, Which the sempron 3100+ Has, Just minus the 64bit support, and they run on an older core, thus making it Older, Not 'top of the line' and cheaper to Maintain.
of cource this brings the problem of it not bieng "future proof" as wel, aka no windows64bit, there you are correct.
keep in mind semprons 3100+ and above are the socket 754 chips, anything under is like a wounded xp.

I see your point and yes i have a clue what im talking about. Most of the stuff i said was from what i have seen on MANY websites benchmark/performance results of athlon 64 bit 3000+ compared to athlon xp 3000+ and the athlon 64 bit had alot better results. I plainly stated that in my own words (just maybe not totally correctly) I know they have HTT thats why they are better than XP'S i didn't say that because every 64 bit i have seen comes with that.


What i basically meant was that with the 64 bit technology beats an XP. And yes i know that since the sempron is a low budget value chip and that the sempron 3100 is basically a athlon64 bit minus the 64 bit support, because it has the same FSB which is 400. But WHAT I MEAN is that the 64 bit technology makes it better. Yes it does just search it in google and see some results from a 64 bit chip (athlon 64) running on 32 bit apps, and a 32bit chip (sempron,xp etc..) running on a 32 bit apps. The ATH64 got way better results from what i have seen. I don't care if you don't agree but i have seent he evidence to back this up. I agree with the points you have said but this reply is merely stating what i know and believe is true. It may not be spot on correct but i know for sure that anyone would rather have athlon64 than any other processor.

But my main point is that you said "Sempron are basically amd64bit chips without 64bit support" and i know that but what i MEANT was that the 64 bit technology is what makes athlon64's alot better. If that isn't obvious you should read some reviews.

thanks for reading.

 

[[w0f]Oblivion]

64bit isnt going to help you in 32bit mode bud.
yes you will get a huge performance increase when 64bit becomes the norm and all, but in 32bit mode, it doesnt do anything.

 

[`unreal]

Yea i read somewhere that 64-bit processors have to emulate 32-bit mode, which Athlon 64's are good at, and apparently Intels Itaniums are incredibly poor at.

 

[[Matt]]

If you want a sempron the one to go for is the 3100+ as its A64 based but with the 64bit extensions disabled... not a bad thing since virtually no apps use the 64 bit extensions yet. They are also very overclockable!

 

[[Matt]]

Yea i read somewhere that 64-bit processors have to emulate 32-bit mode, which Athlon 64's are good at, and apparently Intels Itaniums are incredibly poor at.

They dont emulate 32bit mode since they are 32bit CPU's with 64bit extensions and can therefore handle 32bit threads natively.

 

[niLeGreatFun]

Ahhh so i WAS right Semprons are basically amd64bit chips without 64bit support

 

[Washuu]

Nope, they are slightly glorified athlon-xps....

and the 754 semprons are not the architecture of a 64bit athlon at all, they are most likely athlon-xp with that many pins, that would be to much money into a bargin chip if it was a partially disabled amd64.

 

[Asus]

To set the record straight.
Notice where all the Sempron CPUs are located vs the 3100+ Sempron.

Socket A Semprons are Athlon XP (Thoroughbred core) CPUs with 333FSB but they are labeled compared to Celeron CPUs instead of Pentium 4 CPUs. The Celeron on the other hand is a severely handycapped P4.

Socket 754 Semprons (3100+) are Athlon 64's without the 64bit support. All Athlon 64 benchmarks you see now are run under 32bit (unless said otherwise) FYI. Athlon 64's and the 3100+ Sempron have other changes, such as the ondie memory controller and other CPU architecture changes, that are increasing it's performance over Athlon XP. 64Bit is yet to come.

The Socket A Semprons are good value CPUs that offer solid performance. The 3100+ is an outstanding chip for it's price in the value market as well.

Performance
Another link

 

[firemachine69]

I see alot of retarded posts around. Some in here, however, take the cake.

Here's the "beef":

Sempron 2200+ to 2400+:

Due to it's 333FSB, it's faster then any previous 2200+ / 2400+ Athlon XP (in games, I speak). Multipliers (which you'll notice the clock is lower on the Semprons then the XPs) do little in terms of performance for gaming, it's mostly in the FSB. For a cheap machine or replacement CPU (cheap is the keyword here), it fits the bill perfectly.

Sempron 2500+ to 2900+:

Yes, true this series isn't worth it. Get the XP counterpart for 5 dollars more if you can't afford a new CPU/mobo setup. If you can get a new mobo CPU setup, look at the next step up, the;

Sempron 3100+ (and up):

Assuming ONLY socket 754. Why? It has the unbelievable integrated memory controller. But socket 754 is not the same as what you're used to plugging your Duron/Athlon into (that's socket 462). So a new mobo is required. It is an AMAZING performer however. Basically an A64, with half the cache (which doesn't detract that much performance), and no 64 bit (which this processor will probably be replaced before 64 bit is even mainstream). It mops the deck with what you see in my rig (95% thanks to, again, the integrated memory controller). Not to mention, they are pretty dam good OCers. Definitely worth the 20 dollars on top a Barton/good 462 mobo combo.