• Competitor rules

    Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.

Sempron 64 or Celeron D?

sOLId sPOnGe

sOLId sPOnGe

sOLId sPOnGe

Associate
Joined
7 Dec 2005
Posts
42
Location
Macclesfiled
I'm putting together a PC for my parents, nothing fancy as the PC will only be used for internet browsing, MS office and maybe transferring photos/videos from cameras etc. Should I go for Sempron 3000 (1.8GHz) or Celeron (2.8Ghz)?
I've only ever used AMD myself, but I do a lot of gaming. I'm not sure which would be best to use for my parents PC as I've never used these CPU's.

Any help would be appreciated: D
 
I built a PC for my mum and dads with a Sempron 64 2800+. I think it's the best value cpu I've ever bought. It feels like it out peform my old P4 2.8Ghz northwood but that may be the fact it's a fresh XP install on the PC.

This is the setup I got them

AMD Sempron 64 2800+ 1.6GHz CPU and Gigabyte K8N51GMF nForce 6100 Micro, 512mb Corsair value DDR a WD 80 Harddrive. A antec case the one that comes with the 350watt PSU a DVD rom and that 15inch BenQ LCD monitor.

It all came to just under £342.

that Gigabyte K8N51GMF nForce 6100 Micro ATX motherboard it fantastic value. I think it was £45 with onboard Graphics and sound it also supports Sata2 and PCI-Express.
 
Go for the Sempron 64 over the Celeron D, no question

Get either the 2800+ or the 3100+ as these chips have double the cache which really helps with multi-tasking and general smoothness. IMO the 3000+ isn't a great choice due to the lack of cache :)
 
I built my parents a pc built around a Cele D 2.8ghz (336 - the one with the 64 bit extensions) and I must say I am impressed.

It isn't as fast as my system but just doing general office tasks it is certainly fast enough.

For what you want it for, performance from both the AMD sempron and the Celeron are going to be pretty much equal so go price up going both ways and whichever is cheapest get that.
 
WatchTower said:
I built a PC for my mum and dads with a Sempron 64 2800+. I think it's the best value cpu I've ever bought. It feels like it out peform my old P4 2.8Ghz northwood but that may be the fact it's a fresh XP install on the PC.

This is the setup I got them

AMD Sempron 64 2800+ 1.6GHz CPU and Gigabyte K8N51GMF nForce 6100 Micro, 512mb Corsair value DDR a WD 80 Harddrive. A antec case the one that comes with the 350watt PSU a DVD rom and that 15inch BenQ LCD monitor.

It all came to just under £342.

that Gigabyte K8N51GMF nForce 6100 Micro ATX motherboard it fantastic value. I think it was £45 with onboard Graphics and sound it also supports Sata2 and PCI-Express.
Click to expand...

Sempron it is then :D
That sounds like a decent set-up, just what I'm looking for and just under budget also. Got about 350 quid to spend.
 
james.miller said:
celeron d's arent bad cpu's, but on heat alone i'd go for the sempron:)
Click to expand...

i beg to differ, even at 4ghz the struggle to break 40s pi 1m, a sempron at 2.8 can do <33 and a lot cooler to

also rock at games which (trust me) celerons dont
 
well my 2.8 celeron cant run css at any res with a 9800pro



and btw, if your opty does it in 28s and is a bit faster than your sempt at 33, doesnt that say the opty is a bit faster than the sempy?
 
well in my job i build celeron D pcs all day every day, they make great office pcs and will run the internet/office/and what ever u want to chuck at them.
they are not ment to be gaming cpu's but they do run well,
if some wants a gaming pc il sell them a AMD 64 bla bla

but i carnt fault them
if i had a company and needed pc's id use these every time just for tha fact is ive built 100's and never had one back apart from a couple of duff hard disks,

i even use 2 at home as well. ( i got them cheap )

celeron 3.2 @ 4.6 (it flys) encodes a dvd faster than my 3 gig stock p4
celeron 2.53 @ 3.8

and there so cheap as well,

(overclockers realy need to look into stocking ASROCK BOARDS i no there cheap but they run so and not every one needs a £50 plus board for a office pc )

gavindo :)
 
I think the point is that Sempron 64s also make great office PCs

I'm not surprised that a 4.6GHz overclocked Celeron can encode at the same speed as a stock 3GHz P4 - it's got a huge clock speed advantage!

The thing is that Celeron CPUs aren't just crippled with small cache like the Sempron CPUs - they're crippled in more ways than one shown by the poor Super PI scores, for example
 
yea but office/net/playing a dvd (which is what most of these pcs are geared at family(kids to print school work) /mum&dads pc for ebay/auto route for the day out) isnt going to run any faster because the Super PI score says so,
 
m3csl2004 said:
well my 2.8 celeron cant run css at any res with a 9800pro



and btw, if your opty does it in 28s and is a bit faster than your sempt at 33, doesnt that say the opty is a bit faster than the sempy?
Click to expand...

it isnt a bit faster, it's a lot faster - that's the point. @ 2.8ghz, i get around ~31seconds. 2 seconds ahead and i have 4 times the L2 cache.
 
james.miller said:
it isnt a bit faster, it's a lot faster - that's the point. @ 2.8ghz, i get around ~31seconds. 2 seconds ahead and i have 4 times the L2 cache.
Click to expand...

what, may i ask, is different about these cpus apart from the larger l2 cache of the opty? (which doesnt make a huge differnce as they still have 128k L1)

i reckon if i could steal my mates 939 sempron (the other thing being different about them is the 754 single channel mem controller) and clock it to 2.8, and bench it against an opty at the same speed, i would notice only a small differnce

that said, im all ifs and buts, i dont actually have the 2 to compare so cant actually comment on how they feel to use - make of that what you will :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom