• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

best $80ish CPU

Originally posted by: fatty4ksu
Better OCing..better all around performace imo.
Click to expand...

Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm.

After a bit of thought. How about your wrong.
 
Originally posted by: fatty4ksu
Better OCing..better all around performace imo.
Click to expand...
Really? Haven't read some tests, have you? For example, Sempron 3100+ beats a Celeron 3.06GHz in almost any bench. It seems as if media encoding really is its one strong area, and even then it just slightly edges out the Sempron competition. Aside from that, the Sempron is a very cool running CPU, which can hardly be said about the Celeron. The Sempron is also cheaper.

When it comes to overclocking, the Sempron seem to pull off frequencies ranging between 2.4 and 2.6GHz. This also means that a Celeron would have to run at frequencis of 4.1 to 4.5GHz to be able to compete. So, by saying that the Celerons are better overclockers, you're basically saying that they overclock beyond 4.5GHz. Somehow I doubt that this is a common overclock on air cooling...

So, in the end the Celeron is a slower performer, much hotter during operation, costs more and overclocks to about the same levels. I'm sorry, but I fail to see how that would make the Celeron a better choice.

Since we're on Anandtech, I thought that it might be appropriate to provide a link to Anand's test of the Sempron 3100+ and 3300+ versus the Celeron 3.06GHz.

http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=2395&p=1

A quote from Anand's conclusion:

"Compared to Intel's Celeron D, the Sempron continues to be the better buy and overall, the better performer."
 
relax, its fatty 😉
why not go for an AXP? i seen couple of xp-m 2500+ for about 80$. they oc good afaik. a decent nf2 board costs around 50,- maybe less when u get a good deal.
add a 98pro for about 110$.
 
Palermo. You can get a 2800+ 64-bit enabled Sempron for under $80 at ZZF. As for why not XP-M, well, why would you want a K7 when you can get a K8? These 64-bit semprons have almost all the regular A64 features now, save for CnQ (Semprons under 3000+ don't have CnQ) and a 256k cache (2800+, 3100+) instead of 512k like on a Newcastle. There was an article on Xbitlabs which showed that there is little difference between 256k cache vs. 512k cache on a K8. The Sempron 2800+ delivers a lot for the money.
 
You can get a barton 2500 M for that. Overclocks like a beast. If your limited and dont absolutley have to have 64 bit thats your best performer.
 
a socket 754/939 palermo is going to outpeform the barton due to the on-die memory controller, overclockability is roughly the same
 
Lol BlingBling you just had to say that? Dammit heres the proof Grakkkk TOOK ME ALONG TIME TO FIND THIS

Here is a benchmark of a Xp Oced to 2.4 running about even with a 3.0 GHZ P4. Ok, lets just say it beats the 3.0 GHZ p4 k?
http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/athlonxp-3200_6.html

Ok heres the overclocked Sempron at 2.7
Above the performance of a 2.4 GHZ Venice... If you lower it to around 2.4, you would expect to get the performance of around a 2.1-2.2 Venice......
http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/sempron-3100e_7.html

Ok heres the benchmarks of a Sempron at 2.52 GHZ, around what you would normally expect to get.
http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/sempron-3100-oc_7.html

As you can see the Sempron at 2.52 is around the 3.4 GHZ P4. In applications where AMD is strong, it is strong. In applications where AMD is weak, it is the stronger than the 3400+.
 
Ya.. Too bad the Paris is 130 and not 90nm Ecore revisioin (basically the same process as the venice).
 
thanks hacp, i was looking for reviews with xp-m's, but if your going to get a 939 palermo, save up the 30 bucks and pick up a venice
 
isn't it coming out, though it seems amd has annouced that everything is coming to socket 939

opteron 144

1.8 ghz 1MB cache
 
Originally posted by: Hacp
Ya.. Too bad the Paris is 130 and not 90nm Ecore revisioin (basically the same process as the venice).
Click to expand...


Do you think I know that already 😕. Anyways, it still rocks 😀
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top