Which is faster: Sempron 2.0 MHz or Opteron 1.8 MHz?

[Arkaign]

Originally posted by: SparkyJJO
with that tiny amount of cache on that sempron, I'd go for the opty.

While you're so fast on the draw, go vote for Perot! He needs your support in '92!!!

 

[Zap]

Originally posted by: Arkaign
While you're so fast on the draw, go vote for Perot! He needs your support in '92!!!

Haha, I voted for big ears! Seriously.

 

[Arkaign]

Originally posted by: Zap

Originally posted by: Arkaign
While you're so fast on the draw, go vote for Perot! He needs your support in '92!!!

Haha, I voted for big ears! Seriously.

Cool He was easily better than Spook Bush or Loose Cock Clinton

 

[SparkyJJO]

crap

/hides in a hole

 

[Zap]

Originally posted by: Arkaign

Originally posted by: Zap

Originally posted by: Arkaign
While you're so fast on the draw, go vote for Perot! He needs your support in '92!!!

Haha, I voted for big ears! Seriously.

Cool He was easily better than Spook Bush or Loose Cock Clinton

Funny stuff... my reasoning was because I figured that a businessman couldn't do worse than a career politician, and potentially better (would probably think about ROI on any decision). My grandmother voted for Clinton. Her reasoning was that she figured he would win, and she always votes for who she thinks will win and not who she wanted to win.

 

[Extelleron]

An Opteron 144 would be significantly faster than a Sempron 3300+ (2.0GHz, 128KB L2), especially when dealing with gaming. There are some isolated situations where the only thing that matters is clockspeed and the Sempron will actually be faster. However, from looking at Tom's CPU charts I can see the A64 3000+, which is 1.8GHz but has 512KB of L2 cache (half that of the Opty) is much faster than the Sempron in games and several other apps. The Opty would only increase this lead.

However, I think that you should just leave the system the way it is. Looking at an Anandtech review of the 3300+, I can see that general use performance is very similar between the 3300+ and A64 3000+; the Opty will only be slightly faster than the 3000+. I highly doubt your GF will notice a difference betweem the Opty and her Sempron in general tasks. I would keep things the way they are and use the Opteron in another setup when you can overclock; when overclocked a 144 can often reach 2.6-2.8GHz, FX-55 or 57 range. An Opteron running at stock is a wasted CPU.

here's that AT review if you want to see the 3300+'s performance: http://www23.tomshardware.com/cpu_2005....delx=33&model1=240&chart=60&model2=245

 

[myocardia]

Originally posted by: Extelleron
An Opteron 144 would be significantly faster than a Sempron 3300+ (2.0GHz, 128KB L2), especially when dealing with gaming. There are some isolated situations where the only thing that matters is clockspeed and the Sempron will actually be faster. However, from looking at Tom's CPU charts I can see the A64 3000+, which is 1.8GHz but has 512KB of L2 cache (half that of the Opty) is much faster than the Sempron in games and several other apps. The Opty would only increase this lead.

It doesn't make much difference now that he's bought a 2.4 Ghz 4000, with 1GB of L2 cache. Or are you voting for Ross Perot in the next election, too?

 

[3chordcharlie]

Originally posted by: myocardia

Originally posted by: Extelleron
An Opteron 144 would be significantly faster than a Sempron 3300+ (2.0GHz, 128KB L2), especially when dealing with gaming. There are some isolated situations where the only thing that matters is clockspeed and the Sempron will actually be faster. However, from looking at Tom's CPU charts I can see the A64 3000+, which is 1.8GHz but has 512KB of L2 cache (half that of the Opty) is much faster than the Sempron in games and several other apps. The Opty would only increase this lead.

It doesn't make much difference now that he's bought a 2.4 Ghz 4000, with 1GB of L2 cache. Or are you voting for Ross Perot in the next election, too?

How many pages back was this one hiding?

 

[Zap]

Hey, I voted for "big ears" the last time around.

 

[myocardia]

Originally posted by: 3chordcharlie
How many pages back was this one hiding?

Originally posted by: Towermax
The 4000+ showed up again on Newegg at 79.99 and free shipping--so we bought it. The Opteron 144 and the Sempron 939 will be up for sale soon.

Actually, the 4000+ is ideal for a non-overclocking board--she needs horsepower and can't get it through overclocking.

It was about 8 or 9 posts above my post. For me, this entire thread is still one page, so I'm not sure which page it would be on for you.

 

[3chordcharlie]

Originally posted by: myocardia

Originally posted by: 3chordcharlie
How many pages back was this one hiding?

Originally posted by: Towermax
The 4000+ showed up again on Newegg at 79.99 and free shipping--so we bought it. The Opteron 144 and the Sempron 939 will be up for sale soon.

Actually, the 4000+ is ideal for a non-overclocking board--she needs horsepower and can't get it through overclocking.

It was about 8 or 9 posts above my post. For me, this entire thread is still one page, so I'm not sure which page it would be on for you.

Oh, that's not quite what I meant.

It's ironic that jokes were made two months ago about being late to the party with advice... and now this...

 

[Extelleron]

Originally posted by: myocardia

Originally posted by: Extelleron
An Opteron 144 would be significantly faster than a Sempron 3300+ (2.0GHz, 128KB L2), especially when dealing with gaming. There are some isolated situations where the only thing that matters is clockspeed and the Sempron will actually be faster. However, from looking at Tom's CPU charts I can see the A64 3000+, which is 1.8GHz but has 512KB of L2 cache (half that of the Opty) is much faster than the Sempron in games and several other apps. The Opty would only increase this lead.

It doesn't make much difference now that he's bought a 2.4 Ghz 4000, with 1GB of L2 cache. Or are you voting for Ross Perot in the next election, too?

Didn't even notice that.

Hey, I want a 4000+ with 1GB of L2 cache

 

[Moose1309]

Holy thread resurrection... Anyway, while we're at it, those Sandys are good and still available last I checked.... I recently got one (76 shipped) and mine does 2.94, with 1.4v on mediocre air.... Not a bad use for a spare s939 board! NE even had 3700's up a month ago for even less.

 

[Zap]

I got two at various prices ($80 give or take). The crappy one can barely do 2.7GHz with more vcore. The better one with vcore can do around 3.2, but have it running at 3.12 due to RAM multipliers and the fact that the extra couple MHz takes a WHOLE LOT more vcore.

 

[VirtualLarry]

My recent Sandy 4000+ from NewEgg runs 241 x 12 = 2.89Ghz, at 1.40v. Can't seem to get it stable any faster, no matter what vcore I pump into it.

I'm curious if Zap's chip is Prime95 stable or not, at 3.12Ghz.

 

[Arkaign]

LoL I wondered what this post was doing back in the recent list Funny stuff.

 

[myocardia]

Originally posted by: Extelleron
Hey, I want a 4000+ with 1GB of L2 cache

Haha, you and me both. As a matter of fact, I'm hoping that the 4000 that I have that's still sealed in it's box has 1GB of L2.

 

[MercenaryForHire]

Random thought,

Make sure that gimpy Compaq POS supports the processor you're going to throw in it.

Thank you.

- M4H

 

[Zap]

Originally posted by: VirtualLarry
I'm curious if Zap's chip is Prime95 stable or not, at 3.12Ghz.

I've run the various CPU stress tests off UBCD on it at those speeds (including 3.2GHz).

Like I said, my second 4000+ didn't get anywhere near that. Luck of the draw.