What are they and can I put the socket A ones in my pc? Are they supoose to be better than bartons
Printable View
What are they and can I put the socket A ones in my pc? Are they supoose to be better than bartons
It is a cut-down version of the 754-pin AMD64, but only 256KB L2 cache and 64-bit instructions disabled.
I thought the numbers were supposed to show relative performance, so why does a Sempron 3100+ run just about like a Athlon64 2800+ which is better than a XP3000+? :blink:Quote:
Test results submitted indicate that AMD Sempron 3100+ central processing unit is the is just 2.1% slower in 3DMark 2001SE, 0.4% slower in Superpi, 4.4% faster in Prime95, only 1.2% slower in PCMark 2004 and only 4.5% slower in CPUMark 99 compared to the AMD Athlon 64 2800+ which runs at the same clock-speed. The benchmark results are likely to be higher compared to AMD Athlon XP 3000+ processor, which has enough muscle to outperform forthcoming Intel Celeron 340 (3.00GHz) processor.
cause theyre not all relavant to the same thing.........Quote:
Originally posted by lynx@16 July 2004 - 10:57
I thought the numbers were supposed to show relative performance, so why does a Sempron 3100+ run just about like a Athlon64 2800+ which is better than a XP3000+? :blink:
so a sempron 3100 runs about the same speed as a 64 at 2800....thats pretty good
cause theyre not all relavant to the same thing......... [/b][/quote]Quote:
Originally posted by Storm+16 July 2004 - 04:24--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Storm @ 16 July 2004 - 04:24)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-lynx@16 July 2004 - 10:57
I thought the numbers were supposed to show relative performance, so why does a Sempron 3100+ run just about like a Athlon64 2800+ which is better than a XP3000+? :blink:
Quote: The Sempr0n was clocked at 1800 MHz and was still hiding behind the 3100+ marketing stamp .
What about the Sempron 2500+ 2600+ and 2800+?
cause theyre not all relavant to the same thing......... [/b][/quote]Quote:
Originally posted by Storm+16 July 2004 - 12:24--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Storm @ 16 July 2004 - 12:24)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-lynx@16 July 2004 - 10:57
I thought the numbers were supposed to show relative performance, so why does a Sempron 3100+ run just about like a Athlon64 2800+ which is better than a XP3000+? :blink:
Amd's processor rating is supposed to be the performance of the equivalent Athlon processor, if one existed.
In other words an Athlon 1GHz processor would have a performance rating 1000, and an Athlon XP 2500+ should be the equivalent of an Athlon running at 2.5GHz.
That should mean that all Amd processors using this rating system should have the same performance if they have the same number.
Have Amd changed the rules without notifying anyone?
What about them?Quote:
Originally posted by Keikan@17 July 2004 - 01:19
What about the Sempron 2500+ 2600+ and 2800+?
If you mean will they fit Socket A, the answer is no, they are all Socket 754
What about them?Quote:
Originally posted by lynx+17 July 2004 - 10:55--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (lynx @ 17 July 2004 - 10:55)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-Keikan@17 July 2004 - 01:19
What about the Sempron 2500+ 2600+ and 2800+?
If you mean will they fit Socket A, the answer is no, they are all Socket 754 [/b][/quote]
The AnAndTech lies...
http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets...oc.aspx?i=2083
Anandtech may be right, I hadn't seen that article before.
The article I found could just as easily have been wrong. I didn't keep the link so I can't remember where it was.
Edit: Found the original article here. But if you follow the link to their original story you get a completely different picture.