AMD Sempron based PC
-
Hi, Has anyone used AMD Sempron based PCs? How is the performance? I hope Sempron is in the same category as Intel Celeron. I am building a small network at home with 4-5 machines with Linux in one(or may be two) of them. Because of the small budget, I am trying to get some cheap(but decent) machines. If Sempron is okay, I will go for it. I am not planning going to do any graphic intensive operarations in these machines. Thanks, Madhu.
-
Hi, Has anyone used AMD Sempron based PCs? How is the performance? I hope Sempron is in the same category as Intel Celeron. I am building a small network at home with 4-5 machines with Linux in one(or may be two) of them. Because of the small budget, I am trying to get some cheap(but decent) machines. If Sempron is okay, I will go for it. I am not planning going to do any graphic intensive operarations in these machines. Thanks, Madhu.
Madhu Cheriyedath wrote:
I hope Sempron is in the same category as Intel Celeron.
They are well in front of Celerons. Although they have less cache than the Athlon's I have found Sempron machines to be as fast when using Windows, Office etc. as a standard user. Michael Martin Australia "I controlled my laughter and simple said "No,I am very busy,so I can't write any code for you". The moment they heard this all the smiling face turned into a sad looking face and one of them farted. So i had to leave the place as soon as possible." - Mr.Prakash 24/04/2004
-
Hi, Has anyone used AMD Sempron based PCs? How is the performance? I hope Sempron is in the same category as Intel Celeron. I am building a small network at home with 4-5 machines with Linux in one(or may be two) of them. Because of the small budget, I am trying to get some cheap(but decent) machines. If Sempron is okay, I will go for it. I am not planning going to do any graphic intensive operarations in these machines. Thanks, Madhu.
Both my work station and home stationa are AMD Semprom, and I am very satisfied with the performance. My work station is 2200+ and my home station is 2500+. One of my collegues have a Pentium 4 at 3Gh and when working on his machine I couldn't notice a differnce of speed (even though I expected to see one). regards, Mircea Many people spend their life going to sleep when they’re not sleepy and waking up while they still are.
-
Hi, Has anyone used AMD Sempron based PCs? How is the performance? I hope Sempron is in the same category as Intel Celeron. I am building a small network at home with 4-5 machines with Linux in one(or may be two) of them. Because of the small budget, I am trying to get some cheap(but decent) machines. If Sempron is okay, I will go for it. I am not planning going to do any graphic intensive operarations in these machines. Thanks, Madhu.
They are a lot faster, and much better value for money that the celeron's. Celeron' are effectivley throwing your money away, as they are just far too underpowered for the rest if the kit you put with them (motherbord, memory etc). Most of the Semprons overlclock very nicely as well. Celeron's are as useless as they are, not becuase of the clockspeed (which is quite high actually), but becuase they are P4's with very little cache. Small cache sizes cause P4's problems as they have a very long pipeline in the processor, which when you have cache misses really messes things up. Its why Xeon's (P4's with lots of cache) are faster than P4's. They need lots of cache to get the pipelines up to speed. Semprons's (in fact all of AMD's chips) have smaller pipelines so are not so cache thirsty. Also, they have on chip memory controlers, that greaty reduces main memory latency - so again less cache is needed. Its why Intel is going to kill the P4, and use the Centrino - a suped-up P3 (that have smaller pipelines) as the basis for their mobile, desktop & server chips going forward from about 2007 I think. Lots of cache makes a chip much more expensive as a large cache will takes up the chips die size. To make the Celeron as cheap as it is they have to take all the cahe out - and its on an architecture that needs cache badly. Taking a P4 - cache = bad chip called Celeron. AMD Athlon64 - cache = cheap, cheerful & fast chip that will overclock.
"Je pense, donc je mange." - Rene Descartes 1689 - Just before his mother put his tea on the table. Shameless Plug - Distributed Database Transactions in .NET using COM+
-
They are a lot faster, and much better value for money that the celeron's. Celeron' are effectivley throwing your money away, as they are just far too underpowered for the rest if the kit you put with them (motherbord, memory etc). Most of the Semprons overlclock very nicely as well. Celeron's are as useless as they are, not becuase of the clockspeed (which is quite high actually), but becuase they are P4's with very little cache. Small cache sizes cause P4's problems as they have a very long pipeline in the processor, which when you have cache misses really messes things up. Its why Xeon's (P4's with lots of cache) are faster than P4's. They need lots of cache to get the pipelines up to speed. Semprons's (in fact all of AMD's chips) have smaller pipelines so are not so cache thirsty. Also, they have on chip memory controlers, that greaty reduces main memory latency - so again less cache is needed. Its why Intel is going to kill the P4, and use the Centrino - a suped-up P3 (that have smaller pipelines) as the basis for their mobile, desktop & server chips going forward from about 2007 I think. Lots of cache makes a chip much more expensive as a large cache will takes up the chips die size. To make the Celeron as cheap as it is they have to take all the cahe out - and its on an architecture that needs cache badly. Taking a P4 - cache = bad chip called Celeron. AMD Athlon64 - cache = cheap, cheerful & fast chip that will overclock.
"Je pense, donc je mange." - Rene Descartes 1689 - Just before his mother put his tea on the table. Shameless Plug - Distributed Database Transactions in .NET using COM+
Thanks guys.. I think I will go for 3 Semprons and 1 Athlon 64 for the time being. I am not planning for overclocking... One more thing Hows Linux running on Semprons? Has anyone had any specific issue(not with display adapters, hard drives etc)? Thanks, Madhu. -- modified at 14:55 Saturday 17th December, 2005
-
Hi, Has anyone used AMD Sempron based PCs? How is the performance? I hope Sempron is in the same category as Intel Celeron. I am building a small network at home with 4-5 machines with Linux in one(or may be two) of them. Because of the small budget, I am trying to get some cheap(but decent) machines. If Sempron is okay, I will go for it. I am not planning going to do any graphic intensive operarations in these machines. Thanks, Madhu.
Ask me again mid-week next week; I have parts coming for a Sempron PC coming Mon or Tues. Prices are great, and I am hoping for reasonable performance. I only do software development, and no games. $75.50 Sempron 64 2800+ $73.50 1GB ram $55.00 80GB SATA 150 HD $49.00 ECS 760GX-M MB $38.99 Case + approved PS ------------------------- $291.99 From Newegg.com As an aside: A good review of multiprocessor systems[^] and also has some dual core processor machines.
-
Hi, Has anyone used AMD Sempron based PCs? How is the performance? I hope Sempron is in the same category as Intel Celeron. I am building a small network at home with 4-5 machines with Linux in one(or may be two) of them. Because of the small budget, I am trying to get some cheap(but decent) machines. If Sempron is okay, I will go for it. I am not planning going to do any graphic intensive operarations in these machines. Thanks, Madhu.
Would have to agree with everyone else. I have a Semperon 3200+ and its really fast. Way, Way ahead of a Celeron and so close to a P4 at the equivelant speed its not noticable. Jon