AMD Sempron: A Fresh Take on Budget Computing
by Derek Wilson on July 28, 2004 12:01 AM EST- Posted in
- CPUs
Price/Performance Analysis
In comparing the price/performance data between similarly priced Celerons and Semprons, we can see that the Semprons take down the Intel platform with ease. In most benchmarks, the Sempron processors outperform the Celeron 335, and since both flavors are cheaper than the slower Celeron, price/performance is obviously in favor of AMD here. This isn't even a contest.And we can take it even further and look at how much it would cost to build a Celeron system and a Sempron system. The common components between our systems are: 512MB DDR 400 ($90), Radeon 9800 Pro 256 ($250), 80GB WD harddrive ($60). We found some really cheap cases and power supplies for less than $30. All this brings our base total to $430.
To round out our computers, the Sempron system would have a midrange nForce2 board ($50) and a Sempron 2800+ ($103).
Total Sempron System cost: $583
For the Celeron system, we would need an 856PE board ($70) and a Celeron 335 ($127).
Total Celeron System cost: $627
If we bought a Celeron system, we would be getting lower performance for 7.5% more money. This percentage would be even higher if we didn't test with such an expensive video card. Of course, we can't really make statements about system performance with lower end video cards when it comes to games. Business applications, however, are much less affected by video card choice. We could go with integrated graphics or even a $60 video card. We would spend less than $400 on a Sempron system, saving 10% over a Celeron 335 system.
Or we could look at it from another perspective. Rather than building a cheaper Sempron 2800+ system, we could build a Sempron 3100+ system and get a huge performance leap at the same price point. Maybe we've run the "Sempron is a better value than Celeron" into the ground, but the numbers just don't lie.
Moving on to the next comparison, the very low priced 166MHz Tbred Athlon XP 2600+ (which has a sightly higher clock speed than the Sempron 2800+) serves to beat the newest AMD budget chip at its own game, posting better price/performance numbers in our tests. Well, it's really that they post just about the same performance numers in every test, and that the Sempron costs at least $20 more (which, at these prices, is at least 25% more).
Though the Athlon 64 2800+ led just about all of the benchmarks, its higher price makes the Sempron a better value if you don't need the extra little bit of oomph. The winstone benchmarks tell us that average business users won't see an impact from cutting out half of their cache and going with Sempron, and the small performance hit that we see shows up mostly in gaming and source compilation.
Of course, this price/performance data doesn't take into consideration the value added to the Athlon 64 2800+ via x86-64 support. If this is a feature that the user wants, the extra $25 or so won't be a deal breaker, and the slight performance advantage will be an added bonus.
In the end, feature set is the only driving force between which processor to pick when it comes to Sempron 3100+ and Athlon 64 2800+, as performance isn't a large factor in the equation.
So who's the price performance leader here? That would be the inexpensive Athlon XP chips. But the star of the show is really the K8 Sempron, which knocks about $30 off the price of the 2800+ to deliver performance that is right on par with the more expensive chip.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
55 Comments
View All Comments
draco8099 - Wednesday, July 28, 2004 - link
"Reliability/compatibility hasn't been an issue for a long time. FYI Intel has had 4 recalls in as many years. AMD has never had a recall"I agree that AMD chips are reliable... but AMD does NOT make chipsets.
There where times in the past that I wished VIA or SIS would recall the crap they sometimes produced. Thankfully Nvidia entered the chipset making business.
Bonesdad - Wednesday, July 28, 2004 - link
yah, gotta wonder where he comes up with a statement like "along with the added reliability Intel offers...". This clearly comes from someone with no experience with AMD products. I personally have no qualms about either Intel or AMD when it comes to reliability. But if AMD offers more performance/$$ than Intel, I will always choose AMD.ThePlagiarmaster - Wednesday, July 28, 2004 - link
T8000, You're kidding right? I'll take an Nforce2 with onboard (asus A7n8x-VM/400 $81) over any onboard intel graphics. We're talking geforce4mx here. It can at least play some games. Intel's integrated graphics doesn't even come close even with the 915G chipset.http://www.tomshardware.com/cpu/20040728/sempron-0...
Jeez, up to 3x performance over Intel's integrated graphics...ROFLMAO. You go ahead and buy that Intel integrated crap chipset. BTW the 865/875 is no more current than nforce2. They are both old tech and both decent (uh, except when comparing onboard graphics...nvidia kicks butt here). Last page of toms review: "In addition, motherboards based on the nForce2 Ultra 400 chipset offer more graphics performance than Intel's 865G platform at a similar and sometimes lower price"
So for $81 (asus a7n8x-VM/400) + Sempron 2800 $120 (which is probably REALLY HIGH...more likely $100 when hits pricewatch or less) we have $200 at most. You said it A P4 can beat it for the same money. Well, as soon as you throw in Intel's integrated graphics it doesn't matter what chip you have...YOU LOSE. But you won't spend less than $200 for a P4 and Integrated board. No way. You'd need a P4 2.4 or better just to cache the chip in speed. The graphics is an absolute loss regardless of choices.
Reliability/compatibility hasn't been an issue for a long time. FYI Intel has had 4 recalls in as many years. AMD has never had a recall :)
Zebo - Wednesday, July 28, 2004 - link
"i'm curious how my 2.5ghz barton compares to say a semperon running at 2.0-2.2ghz "Is'nt everyone:)
Socket754 wise I think a sempron is about 10% faster than the mobileXP's at same speeds so 2.2 would probably equal or beat a 2.5 A-XP......Can't wait:):):)
bearxor - Wednesday, July 28, 2004 - link
#27I thought about that angle, and while it should work, the fact of the matter is that mpga478 is about to be just as dead as socket 462. If newer Celeron-D's were LGA 775, you could make a case for a better upgrade path with PCI-e and such.
I'm sorry guys, but I'm comparing the Sempron 2800+ with the Celeron 335, which runs at 2.8ghz. I'm not going to compare the Celeron to the Socket 754 3100+, as its name clearly states its a 3100+. If there was a Celeron running at 3100 or so, then I could compare them.
Comparing between the two 2800 classes, there just doesn't seem to be a nail in the coffin. Someone who is going to buy something like this is going to be happy with either one.
Zebo - Wednesday, July 28, 2004 - link
Derek anything we'd like to see?Yes. I'd like to see you using good aftermarket HS.
Then I think you can get the celeron D to 3.8 to 4.0.
Also, The sempron 3100 is of most intrest to me..as it's already fast, offers cheap MOBOs like the chaintech, and I think will make 2.6 on air easy due to less cache..
Not so impressed with the socketA semprons as I think the moblie Athlons are so much better both in overclcoking and perfromance. Anyway it would be cool to throw a 2600moblie in there at 2.6..
Thanks:)
tfranzese - Wednesday, July 28, 2004 - link
"added reliability Intel offers"Where is it? Don't you read the news, Intel now reliably offers chipset recalls and EEPROM updates just for you.
You're either living in the past or should be on Intel's marketing payroll because you reek of it.
tfranzese - Wednesday, July 28, 2004 - link
"For Sempron Socket 752, I think the added cost of getting a suitable mainboard places it in the price range of a Pentium 4, that will outperform it with ease."Really, can you back that up?
T8000 - Wednesday, July 28, 2004 - link
With these small performance differences, I would say $20 more buys you a current Intel DDR-1/AGP platform (i865 + C335) instead of an old AMD platform (nf400 + S2800). Along with the added reliability Intel offers and the very inexpensive optional "Extreme" 2D graphics you can get, I do not think Sempron Socket A is a sensible choice.For Sempron Socket 752, I think the added cost of getting a suitable mainboard places it in the price range of a Pentium 4, that will outperform it with ease.
So I think there is no reason to be so optimistic about Sempron, especially considering the benchmark selection in this review, that might make Sempron look better then it would in the real world.
DerekWilson - Wednesday, July 28, 2004 - link
Both the K7 and K8 Sempron chips dissipate 62W of power maximally.We hear that mobile chips will be coming out with mobile chips which will be in the 25W-30W range.
I'll update the article with this info.