Sempron Ratings

[996GT2]

Looking at the ratings for the new AM2 Sempron 64s, I wondered why AMD rates them differently from Athlon 64s. For example, a Sempron64 3200+ Manila is a 1.8Ghz part with 128k L2 cache, while an Athlon64 3200+ is 2.0Ghz with 512k L2 cache. The sempron with the same clock as the A64 3200+ is the 3600+, and even that only has 1/2 of the A64's L2 cache. So why does AMD rate Semprons higher than A64s?

 

[dguy6789]

Athlon 64 ratings are for vs. a Pentium 4. Sempron ratings are for vs. a Celeron.

 

[justly]

Semprons and Athlons target different markets (just like Celerons and Pentiums where) so there ratings are based on the type of market they are designed for.

If this doesn't clear thing up, and it probably doesn't, then consider that the semprons are tested/rated to compete with the Celeron line while the Athlons rating is more in line with a Pentium.

This rating system has some good and bad points. One of the bad points is you have to know that there is a difference between the two processor lines. Another is that people tend to think of the rating as a measure of MHz/GHz. This problem is compounded by the fact that Intel is no longer using MHz/GHz to identify a specific model, add to that Intels change to a more Athlon type architecture (slower MHz/GHz with higher performance) will make AMDs rating system even less usefull when comparing against Intels new architecture.

 

[RichUK]

nm.