Sempron 2400+ performance question

[Jim Bancroft]

Using the dreaded phrase "all else being equal," how much slower is this chip than, say, an Athlon 64 2800? Is it half the speed, one-quarter as fast, that sort of comparison. No overclocking assumed. More curious than anything, as I'm hoping it won't be a complete bottleneck.

Sis needs a new box so I'm putting together a Socket A solution with the Sempron in it. She'll do some web browsing, Micro$oft Word and Powerpoint, check email and view the occasional DVD too-- I got her an FX5200 AGP card to go along with the new chip and motherboard. I'm hoping this rig holds her for 2-3 years, till she's out of school.

 

[Sparky19692]

Yep I would like to know also. Looking for a new kids PC Found the Sempron (edit 2500)with MOBO combo for $74.00 sound and lan on board. think just reuse Ti4200 vid and 30Gig HD. I was thinking a desent PC for school and light game pay with memory adn shipping $150.oo not bad.

 

[MadEye2]

I have a Sempron 2200+ running at 1.5Ghz. According to the benchmarking software I've used it's on a par with an Althon XP running at 1.4Ghz. I have a ti4200 too and the performance of both are acceptable for me. Apparently my set up can run Half Life 2 at 1024*768 without AA at a good frame rate, and SimCity4 is very playable with mid to high graphics settings

 

[Sparky19692]

Ok Thanks. I may just pick it up for a second pc this week if there still on sale.

 

[CheesePoofs]

It will probably be noticable slower than the A64 chip, just because the sempron your looking at is an Athlon xp, and the Athlon 64's are, clock for clock, faster than the Athlon xp's. Plus they have the built in mem controller, which helps speed them up more.

However, if your just using the computer for web/word processing and the occasionally comp intensive task, the sempron should be fine.

 

[Duvie]

I had a 2400+ sempron....It benched in most things lower then the xp 2100+ it had been part time replacing....The 333fsb and pc2700 made little diff versus the 266fsb of the 2100+ and running it at 333mhz.....

For most common uses like mentioned this thing is fine, however I think xps if found (more so on the net) may be a better buy for price/performance

 

[drpootums]

I think it's exactly the same as an Athlon XP 2000+ (same clock speed, same cache, etc.).

 

[MadEye2]

Just done a few quick tests on Sandra, not exactly scientific because theres a few variables not pinned down but here goes.

Processor
Model : AMD Sempron(tm) 2200+
Speed : 1.49GHz
Model Number : 2200 (estimated)
Performance Rating : PR2166 (estimated)
Type : Standard
L2 On-board Cache : 256kB ECC Synchronous Write-Back (16-way, 64 byte line size)

Chipset 1
Model : VIA Technologies Inc KM400 CPU to PCI Bridge
Front Side Bus Speed : 2x 166MHz (332MHz data rate)

CPU Arithmetic Benchmark

Mine: Dhry 5994, Whet 2297
Athlon 1.2GHz: Dhry 4986, Whet 1899
Athlon XP 1600+ 1.4GHz: Dhry 5817, Whet 2216
Athlon XP 1800+ 1.53GHz: Dhry 6370, Whet 2426

CPU Multi-Media Benchmark

Mine: Int 13746, Float 14644
Athlon 1.2GHz: Int 11355, Float 12756
Athlon XP 1600+ 1.4GHz: Int 13260, Float 14057
Athlon XP 1800+ 1.53Ghz: Int 14520, Float 15392

 

[bupkus]

Originally posted by: Duvie
I had a 2400+ sempron....It benched in most things lower then the xp 2100+ it had been part time replacing....The 333fsb and pc2700 made little diff versus the 266fsb of the 2100+ and running it at 333mhz.....

For most common uses like mentioned this thing is fine, however I think xps if found (more so on the net) may be a better buy for price/performance

Because of your statement about the fsb making little speed difference I tried to figure out the importance of fsb to performance.

I couldn't run tests so I did a little figuring with AMD's posted processor numbers:
Sempron
XP

I found one example where AMD posted the same model speed but with different fsb on the XP page:
AXDA3000DKV4E 3000+ 2100MHz 10.5X 400MHz 512KB L2
AXDA3000DKV4D 3000+ 2167MHz 13.0X 333MHz 512KB L2
A little math: 2167MHz-2100MHz=67MHz; 67MHz/2100MHz*100=3.2% increase in clock speed
400MHZ-333MHz=67MHz however 67MHz/333MHz*100=20% increase in fsb speed
Here AMD equates a 20% fsb speed boost to a 3.2% cpu clock speed boost.
Of course
333MHZ-266MHz=67MHz however 67MHz/266MHz*100=25% increase in fsb speed which may interpret into a 4% boost in cpu clock speed.

As more than one person posted about the Athlon CPU's, cache or fsb don't really make up for more clock speed. However, depending on how one would interpret this, the relative costs of uping the cpu clock vs. the cost of upping the fsb or cache should be considered by the buyer. Obviously I am comparing fsb to clock speed and on some spreadsheets I'm doing I'm trying to compare the relative worth of boosting the fsb and cache and then again the memory.

I'm afraid it's too much for me. Maybe if I were more intimate with the industry instead of an outside observer I'd have a chance. I suppose that's why I need this forum and Anand.

 

[superkdogg]

This article should help. Pay attention to other system components-I didn't check to make sure it's a fair comparison.


Sempron Comparo