Socket A & 754 Sempron caution.

  • Thread starter Thread starter Wes Newell
  • Start date Start date
W

Wes Newell

I don't know if this is well known or not but AMD has used different
criteria in giving the Sempron line of cpu's its PR numbers. So don't
buy a Sempron 3100+ expecting it to be faster than an Athlon 64 3000+.
Because it's nowhere close to as fast. AMD ommitted a bunch of the
benchmarks used for Athlon XP's and Athlon 64 so the Semprons could have
higher PR numbers. The sempron 3100+ won't even keep up with an Athlon 64
2800+ And the Sempron for Socket A 2800+ is actually a tbred B core
running slower (12x166) than the XP 2600+ tbred (12.5x166).

As info only, I crossposted this to several groups.
 
Wes Newell said:
I don't know if this is well known or not but AMD has used different
criteria in giving the Sempron line of cpu's its PR numbers. So don't
buy a Sempron 3100+ expecting it to be faster than an Athlon 64 3000+.
Because it's nowhere close to as fast. AMD ommitted a bunch of the
benchmarks used for Athlon XP's and Athlon 64 so the Semprons could have
higher PR numbers. The sempron 3100+ won't even keep up with an Athlon 64
2800+ And the Sempron for Socket A 2800+ is actually a tbred B core
running slower (12x166) than the XP 2600+ tbred (12.5x166).

As info only, I crossposted this to several groups.
Click to expand...

Thank you. I for one recommend not purchasing a 754 socket CPU at all. I
recommend going straight for the 939 based motherboard and CPU, thus you
preserve your investment for at least 2 years. :o)

Hank Kimball
"I have an important message for you, life or death." .. Ok, what is the
message? "What message?"
 
I don't know if this is well known or not but AMD has used different
criteria in giving the Sempron line of cpu's its PR numbers. So don't
buy a Sempron 3100+ expecting it to be faster than an Athlon 64 3000+.
Because it's nowhere close to as fast. AMD ommitted a bunch of the
benchmarks used for Athlon XP's and Athlon 64 so the Semprons could have
higher PR numbers. The sempron 3100+ won't even keep up with an Athlon 64
2800+ And the Sempron for Socket A 2800+ is actually a tbred B core
running slower (12x166) than the XP 2600+ tbred (12.5x166).
Click to expand...
As info only, I crossposted this to several groups.
Click to expand...

Once again, your ahead of the game - thanx for the ' heads up ' Wes !

BoroLad
 
Wes Newell said:
I don't know if this is well known or not but AMD has used different
criteria in giving the Sempron line of cpu's its PR numbers. So don't
buy a Sempron 3100+ expecting it to be faster than an Athlon 64 3000+.
Because it's nowhere close to as fast. AMD ommitted a bunch of the
benchmarks used for Athlon XP's and Athlon 64 so the Semprons could have
higher PR numbers. The sempron 3100+ won't even keep up with an Athlon 64
2800+ And the Sempron for Socket A 2800+ is actually a tbred B core
running slower (12x166) than the XP 2600+ tbred (12.5x166).

As info only, I crossposted this to several groups.
Click to expand...


Yea, The benchark is supposed to be a close to a CeleronD comparision
chart..
 
Hank said:
Thank you. I for one recommend not purchasing a 754 socket CPU at
all. I recommend going straight for the 939 based motherboard and
CPU, thus you preserve your investment for at least 2 years. :o)
Click to expand...

Looks like I'm just about to do the opposite and get a Socket 754 CPU. Can't
really justify the extra for a 3500+, when I expect to upgrade the CPU and
board together.
 
If your willing to go to a 754 then you might as well just stick with
your skt A (if that's what you have the 939 kicks ass compared (in all
of the benchmarks, and from the huge gaps i would tend to belive that it
would really affect the feeling you get)
Click to expand...

You must be looking at different benchmarks than I am. Except for
bandwidth, they seem pretty close, model for model. The only advantage to
939 over 754 is the dual channel ram. And of course future upgrades past
3700+. Starting with a 3000+ that still leaves room. The price difference
is a lot greater than the performance difference at this time.
 
rstlne said:
If your willing to go to a 754 then you might as well just stick with
your skt A (if that's what you have)
the 939 kicks ass compared (in all of the benchmarks, and from the
huge gaps i would tend to belive that it would really affect the
feeling you get)
Click to expand...

What benchmarks are you looking at? The ones I've seen show a small
difference between the 3400+ and 3500+.
 
Looks like I'm just about to do the opposite and get a Socket 754 CPU. Can't
really justify the extra for a 3500+, when I expect to upgrade the CPU and
board together.
Click to expand...


If your willing to go to a 754 then you might as well just stick with your
skt A (if that's what you have)
the 939 kicks ass compared (in all of the benchmarks, and from the huge gaps
i would tend to belive that it would really affect the feeling you get)
 
rstlne> If your willing to go to a 754 then you might as well just
rstlne> stick with your skt A (if that's what you have) the 939 kicks
rstlne> ass compared (in all of the benchmarks, and from the huge
rstlne> gaps i would tend to belive that it would really affect the
rstlne> feeling you get)


Really. Anyway the few benchmarks I have seen don't show that
significant of a performance difference between 939 vs 754. Could you
kindly send a url that shows these big differences.

Thanks

Alan
 
rstlne said:
If your willing to go to a 754 then you might as well just stick with your
skt A (if that's what you have)
the 939 kicks ass compared (in all of the benchmarks, and from the huge gaps
i would tend to belive that it would really affect the feeling you get)
Click to expand...

I read that 939 requires matched pairs of memory. Do they have to be
identical, or can they be different brands of the same type?


--
Ed Light

Smiley :-/
MS Smiley :-\

Send spam to the FTC at
(e-mail address removed)
Thanks, robots.
 
The safest thing to do is to purchase a matched set. Same size, same
speed, and same brand. One of the problems is matching up all the
timing. If you look at the specs for different brands, you will see
they use different timings. And it may well end up being the cheapest.
If you don't go with a matched set and you start having weird
problems, like spontaneous rebooting, you will have to then buy a
matched set to fix your unexplained problems.
 
Old news, anyway, who looks at model numbers?
Click to expand...
Well, my guess is that 90% of the buying public look at no more than the
model numbers. To them, the bigger the better, which isn't the case now.
AMD is basically pulling a smooth marketing ploy. Giving the Sempron
bigger numbers and pricng them higher than competing faster cpu's. This
way it looks like they aren't raising prices, which is exactly what they
are really doing by then discontinuing the XP/Duron line of cpu's.
 
I was hoping to use my two pc2700/333 Corsair Value Selects, but the two are
totally different and not actually made by Corsair.

--
Ed Light

Smiley :-/
MS Smiley :-\

Send spam to the FTC at
(e-mail address removed)
Thanks, robots.
 
Ed said:
I was hoping to use my two pc2700/333 Corsair Value Selects, but the two
are totally different and not actually made by Corsair.
Click to expand...


It should be fine, just set the timings such that both DIMMS are within spec
for all parameters.

Would probably be better to use PC3200 though.

Ben
 
Ben Pope said:
It should be fine, just set the timings such that both DIMMS are within spec
for all parameters.

Would probably be better to use PC3200 though.
Click to expand...

Yes, it will have to scale it down from the bus, instead of up from 133/266
as it is now (still runs faster than in synch on benchmarks).

In interim, I've just got a 2200+ 35w Barton mobile I'm going to make a
3000+ (2150 @ 333 @ 1.5v) with the wires in the socket method - I hope it
works on my KT400.


--
Ed Light

Smiley :-/
MS Smiley :-\

Send spam to the FTC at
(e-mail address removed)
Thanks, robots.
 
Well, my guess is that 90% of the buying public look at no more than the
model numbers. To them, the bigger the better, which isn't the case now.
Click to expand...

I meant who in these groups look or cares what the model numbers are? ;p
Ed
 
Ed said:
Yes, it will have to scale it down from the bus, instead of up from
133/266 as it is now (still runs faster than in synch on benchmarks).
Click to expand...

It probably will be faster on a VIA.
In interim, I've just got a 2200+ 35w Barton mobile I'm going to make a
3000+ (2150 @ 333 @ 1.5v) with the wires in the socket method - I hope it
works on my KT400.
Click to expand...


Go for it, don't see why not.

Ben
 
Ed said:
I meant who in these groups look or cares what the model numbers are? ;p
Ed
Click to expand...

I would look at the model number.

Then I would go find out what differences the core has to the other cores I
know. Then I would guess at how they perform. Then I would also then go
look at some benchmarks.

Ben
 
Back
Top