Sempron confusion and overclocking potential?

[BlueWeasel]

After getting the parts together for a cheap Sempron system (I'm helping a friend build), I've gotten the bug to upgrade my aging XP-M 2600+ @ 2.4Ghz and NF2 Ultra. They've served me well the past few years. But, I've seen mobile 2600+ chips going for $110 bucks on Ebay, I'm hoping to come out about even on the upgrade.

I'm planning on picking up a DFI NF3 754 board used for the board upgrade. I just don't game as much as I used to, and for many of the older games I still play, my XP-M and 9800XT are overkill.

I was thinking about picking up the Sempron 3300+ but many reviews I seen claim the 3100+ overclocks just as well. Since the 3100+ has 256k of L2 cache, it seems like it would be the better choice, right?

The 32-bit 3300+ Semprons seem to be a little cheaper than the A64 (64-bit) 3300+ Semprons. I really haven't kept up with the 64-bit hardware simply because the XP-M has been working great for me. Picking up the A64 Sempron seems the way to go, but is there an overclocking difference between 32/64?

256k L2 cache vs 128k -- is there really a big performance difference in CPU-intenstive tasks like gaming or video encoding? My experience is you can always make up for the cache difference in an extra 100-200Mhz in CPU speed.

 

[alpha88]

I don't know anything about semprons, so I can't help you there. I'd personally recommend the 3000+ Venice, they were great overclockers and should be pretty cheap (socket 939)

 

[Blooz]

I'd get a 3100+ 64-bit and O/C it - the E6 core will do 2.5 easily, probably 2.6.

People seem to spend so much time agonizing about the cache size - I've never seen much difference in performance myself.

 

[PingSpike]

Make sure you get a chip with the palermo core (all 64bit semprons should be this) because those are basically venice and overclock better. I'd get one with 256k cache myself.

 

[Zap]

Not only Palermo, but E3 or E6 core. The D0 core won't do as well.