Do you have a question? Post it now! No Registration Necessary. Now with pictures!
- Posted on
- AMD Sempron
March 23, 2005, 6:47 pm
rate this thread
Re: AMD Sempron
On Wed, 23 Mar 2005 18:47:28 GMT, "JF"
Not an advancement, merely an Athlon XP with a 166MHz
(DDR333) FSB when formerly that (total MHz speed of) CPU in
the XP line would've had a lower XP(nnnn) name. In other
words, a Sempron 2500 is significantly lower performance
than an Athlon XP2500. As for whether it's a good upgrade,
you still have the same criteria, to look at what you have
and how much of an increase it is for the $$.
FWIW, the Sempron 2500 overclocks good just as Athlon XP
did, though with the multiplier locks you need a board that
can run DDR400/200MHz FSB and beyond to get the most out of
it... unless you're adept at manipulating the multiplier
bridges to achieve a different default multiplier, something
a Google search might turn up information on... or maybe
it's not practical on a Sempron 2500 due to it's default
multiplier, don't know as I've never checked on that angle.
Re: AMD Sempron
Earlier this month I replaced the Athlon XP 2000+ in my office
computer with a Sempron 2400+ (not because I thought the
Sempron would be faster - long story, not relevant here). The
two have the same clock frequency of 1667 MHz but the
Sempron has a higher PR number because it's meant to
compete with a Celeron instead of a P4.
I ran a series of tests auto-routing some electronic PCB designs
just before and right after the change. They finished in exactly the
same time. I guess for certain applications, the Sempron 2400+
may have a very slight edge over the XP 2000+ because of the
higher FSB, but nothing really significant.
So I guess we can say Sempron 2400+ = Athlon XP 2000+,
and correspondingly so for other PR numbers.
- » I'M trying to install W2k but my bios can't find the harddrive.
- — Previous thread in » Computer Hardware