Sempron 3000+ vs. Celeron D 356?

Do you have a question? Post it now! No Registration Necessary.  Now with pictures!

Threaded View
All other things beings equal, which is faster, an AMD Sempron 3000+
(939 socket) or an Intel Celeron D 356? I have to decide between two
otherwise equivalent systems.




Re: Sempron 3000+ vs. Celeron D 356?

Quoted text here. Click to load it

Celeron D 356 is Cedar Mill core, with larger than normal
cache for the Celeron D family. This has 512KB and the
other members of the Celeron D family are 256MB.

SL96N 3.33 GHz 356   N/A   533 MHz  65 nm C1 512 KB   LGA 775

Celeron D 356 versus Sempron 3400 is benchmarked here:


Re: Sempron 3000+ vs. Celeron D 356?

Thanks for that link. The findings are a little hard to interpret given
language issues, and the Sempron 3400+ is a bit different from the
Sempron 3000+, but it looks like the Celeron D 356 would pretty much
beat the stuffing out of a Sempron 3000+.

The meager L2 cache on the Sempron is a big factor. On the other hand,
the Celeron supposedly runs much hotter and takes a much bigger fan and
heatsink. At least that's what I've heard. Maybe I should just spend a
bit more and get the Athlon 64.



Paul wrote:
Quoted text here. Click to load it

Re: Sempron 3000+ vs. Celeron D 356?

On 2 Aug 2006 11:36:50 -0700, "Thomas Nickerson"

Quoted text here. Click to load it

The answer as always is to ignore the most common benchmarks
and seek benchmarks of exactly what you will be doing.  It
is the only valid comparison between two CPU of
significantly different architectures.

Even so, on average yes the Celeron D 356 is a quite good
value right now due to the larger L2 cache than predecessors
combined with a very low cost today.  If it is performance
that matters though, why these comparisons?  They would have
to be put in context of the cheapest motherboard, memory,
hard drive, etc, too... if the goal is most performance per

Site Timeline