which of the following CPUs to buy

[dlewis]

Hi guys,

first time on here so go easy. Looking to upgrade with a budget and I'm stuck between Celeron D335 CPU or the AMD Sempron 3100. Use PC for pretty much everything, from work to games. I've read some performance tests and they seem to be neck-in-neck but the fact the celeron has a clock speed of 1ghz more than the sempron has me a bit confused.

Any help much appreciated, Dave.

[Fresco]

Most enthusiats will recommend AMD over Intel chips. The MHz speed should no longer be used as a comparison on performance.

Perhaps someone else will be able to advise between Celeron and Sempron, but at the higher end of the market, the AMD chips consistantly out perform the Intel chips even though they have a much lower clock speed.

It all acomes down to good design.

[skuzgib]

Deffo the sempron - it willl trounce the celeron at stock spedds and is a fantasic overclocker

[aidanjt]

Celeron's will require a slightly more expensive 'P4' board, you should go for a Socket A board and with the money saved you can go for a low end Athlon XP Barton, Budget cpu's suffer from small cache memory and hinder performance, this is most noticeable with games.

[Rave]

The Sempron 3100 is for Socket 754, not socket A, and it's based on the A64 architecture so it's a fair bit faster than a Barton at the same clockspeed.

TBH the Sempron 3100 is a good processor but to be quite honest you might as well get an A64 2800 for about a fiver more; same clockspeed, twice the L2 cache, and 64bit enabled. For all round use it'll be a fair bit better than a Celeron; the only area where the Celeron would have the edge would be for media encoding.

Rich :¬)

[Kumagoro]

I was considering which cheapo chip to get and I was considering the sempron 3100+
but looking at prices (£95) and recommendations on here the AMD 64 3000+ (winchester core) was the most recommended for price and over clockability.

http://www.ebuyer.com/customer/produ...duct_uid=79190

Its out of stock at the moment... not sure why.. are all winchesters in short supply?


Winchester 3000 socket 939> 512 KB L2 cache @ 1.8 GHz (£95)
Sempron 3100 socket 754> 256 KB L2 cache @1.8 GHz (£80)

http://www.ebuyer.com/customer/produ...duct_uid=65077

SO what are you getting for an exta £15, you are actually getting a faster chip
even though the rating is higher on the sempron 3100+ plus you are on socket 939
which means there will be faster chips in the future... that means when you want a bit more power you could pick up a 4000+ on ebay for £50 in a year or two.

[aidanjt]

I can dig that.. winchester would be a good cpu to go for if its in your budget range

[Rave]

Sempron numbers and A64 numbers are not comparable. The S939 A64 3000+ runs at the same clockspeed as the Sempron 3100 but has twice the cache and dual channel memory, which overall will make it 5-10% faster. Being a 90nm chip it should also overclock better and potentially use less power/ run cooler.

I agree that coughing up the extra is probably worth it. AMD are due a price drop in about two weeks time, so hang on and see what happens is my advice.

[chriswood_7]

Get yourself a 3000+ 939 winny if you can stretch that little bit extra! The boards are a bit more expensive again, but the performance increase is well worth it. Why buy a 32 bit processor and system that will be out of date as you buy it? Got for a 64 bit system for now, you wont regret it once Windows is fully compatible with it, and even then I noticed a 6000 mark increase on 3Dmark2001SE by getting a winny 939. Trust me, save up and go for a 939 board and chip

Winchester 3000+ on ebuyer £95 you cant go wrong seriously!

Cheers

Chris

[malfunction]

The A64 route is probably the most future proof. You don't say what you have at the moment though - it might be a lot cheaper to upgrade your current system than to start from scratch - though that's obviously the nicest way to do it for the true geek

[Lee H]

http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets...spx?i=2330&p=2

Another vote for spending a "little" bit more and getting a true AMD 64 processor

[BlueMagician]

...Another vote for spending a "little" bit more and getting a true AMD 64 processor ...

S.

[pumpman]

winnie 3000 gets my vote from the ones youve listed

[aidanjt]

The A64 route is probably the most future proof. You don't say what you have at the moment though - it might be a lot cheaper to upgrade your current system than to start from scratch - though that's obviously the nicest way to do it for the true geek

'Future-proofing' is a total oxymoron where the computing industry is concerned. More of a psychology gimmick to trick people into parting with their well earned cash imo...

But an A64 would definatly be the better option here.

[malfunction]

'Future-proofing' is a total oxymoron where the computing industry is concerned

Of course it is - all I said was that the A64 is the best option - solid performer, socket isn't about to be dropped forever, x86-64 capable, existing mobos should be able to take dual core CPUs. Get a PCI express mobo and you'll have less trouble upgrading the PC (faster CPU or GFX card) down the line than a socket A / AGP based system... That's as future proof as any option's going to get.

[aidanjt]

ain't that the truth