Brian Sanderson(Mostly Harmless) posted this on Thursday, 3rd March 2005, 15:49
I`m looking to replace my current motherboard/cpu/memory (currently a Duron 700).
I want something with more processing power mainly for encoding video, it currently takes over four hours to encode a picture slideshow using Ulead DVD Pictureshow.
Does anyone know if the Athlon 64 is worth the extra money over the Sempron, or is the performance difference marginal?
RE: Athlon 64 Vs Sempron
sj(Elite) posted this on Thursday, 3rd March 2005, 16:09
There`s no comparison really. The Athlon 64 is about as future proof as you can get right now. If you`re looking at really `using` a PC (encoding video etc.) then it has to be the 64 bit one..
Ste
We will pay the price but we will not count the cost..
RE: Athlon 64 Vs Sempron
AH14(Elite) posted this on Thursday, 3rd March 2005, 16:14
whats the difference between the Athlon Vs Sempron
RE: Athlon 64 Vs Sempron
sj(Elite) posted this on Thursday, 3rd March 2005, 16:17
Quote: whats the difference between the Athlon Vs SempronFor a given clock speed, I`d go for the Athlon still. Is that right anybody? Although Celerons (Pentium equivalent of Sempron?) have come on, I think they`re still regarded as more budget processors.
Ste
We will pay the price but we will not count the cost..
RE: Athlon 64 Vs Sempron
Miles(Elite Donator) posted this on Thursday, 3rd March 2005, 16:29
Ste - you`re right.
Basically the Semprons are Athlons with cut-down L2 cache (same deal as the difference between the Pentium4s and Celerons).
I would (if having the choice) always go for the AMD 64-bit chip. You will not look back.
Miles
"42"
RE: Athlon 64 Vs Sempron
Brian Sanderson(Mostly Harmless) posted this on Friday, 4th March 2005, 10:37
Does anyone know roughly how much faster a Athlon 64 3000+ would be as compared to a Sempron 3000+? The price difference is about £40 I was wondering if it would be worth it.
RE: Athlon 64 Vs Sempron
Miles(Elite Donator) posted this on Friday, 4th March 2005, 12:23
Definitely go for the 64bit chip.
The Semprons only have 333Mhz FSB (if I remember rightly). Whereas the 64bit chips use the DDR400 (400Mhz FSB).
In terms of pure Mhz speed they are the same (2.0Ghz) ...but in real terms (ie how fast they process things) the 64bit chip will win because of the additional L2 cache & 64bit architecture
In other words...for the sake of £40 I wouldn`t think twice :D
"42"
RE: Athlon 64 Vs Sempron
Brian Sanderson(Mostly Harmless) posted this on Friday, 4th March 2005, 12:48
OK I`ll probably go for the 64.
One last question. Is there a big difference between a 64 3000+ and a 64 3200+? The price difference is about £70. Will you only get a 7% increase in number crunching power (200/3000=6.67%)?
RE: Athlon 64 Vs Sempron
RichardH(Elite) posted this on Friday, 4th March 2005, 12:51
Stating the bleedin` obvious, but whatever processor you select, make sure you get the appropriate motherboard too - that might add more to the cost differential.
This item was edited on Friday, 4th March 2005, 12:53
RE: Athlon 64 Vs Sempron
Brian Sanderson(Mostly Harmless) posted this on Friday, 4th March 2005, 12:55
I`m looking at sets containing motherboard, CPU and memory so compatibility is not an issue.
"42"
