• 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.

Sempron vs Celeron M

Kelemvor

Lifer
How do these two types of Processors comapre? I'm looking for a budget laptop for internet, email, etc and see most with a Celeron M and some with the Sempron.

If they were both the same Ghz rating, what sort of performance difference would there be or would it really not be noticable?
 
go with a celeron M. You can at least upgrade the CPU later if need be. I know the compaq that's like $500 or $600 wit ha celeron M 440 is upgradeable to a Core2Duo
 
I'm not really worried about upgrading since I'll probably just put XP on it anyway and it won't be doing any gaming or number crunching. heh.
 
If your not number crunching or gaming then performance is largely irrelivent, check out the power consumption of the two, i know the celeron M lacks the pentium M's power saving features, dunno about the sempron though, power consumption should be your main concern.
 
Originally posted by: Soviet
If your not number crunching or gaming then performance is largely irrelevant, check out the power consumption of the two, i know the celeron M lacks the pentium M's power saving features, dunno about the sempron though, power consumption should be your main concern.

I will be checking that out but wanted to first narrow down if either the Sempron or Celeron M had any definite speed advantage that I needed to be concerned about since laptops with either chips are almost identical in price.

But if there's no real speed difference, then I will put more weight on battery life and things like that as well.

Thanks.
 
go with the celeron m 4xx series over 3xx, the 4xx is basically a core solo with less cache. much better than a sempron or celeron m 3xx. actually it's probably comparable to a turion 64.
 
Originally posted by: Rottie
I think Sempron is faster than Celeron because Sempron is really Althon XP rebranded name.

only the socket a semprons; the 754 and 939 semprons are neutered a64's, but he's talking about the mobile ones. idk if the mobile sempy's are neutered turions or what, but i do know that the celeron m 4xx's are much better, as they are core solo's with less cache.
 
Real life comparison with my Gateway and my friends HP, I can get almost 3 hours of battery life with my Celeron M while my friend has a max of 1 hour and 30 minutes. All this is just web surfing, word documents, bunch of basic stuff, no videos or gaming, both equipped with a 6-cell battery.
 
Back
Top