# AMD Sempron, Athlon or Duron is best?



## readermaniax (Jul 26, 2005)

I am planning to buy a system. I give Performance first place. 
I am a gamer and need some graphics too. 

Is AMD Sempron, Athlon or Duron the best? 
Which M/B to buy? 
And RAM? 

Give me all sorts of advices not to fall in any dillema or cheats. 

NB:Also when I used a system with MERCURY 400 W SMPS in my house, there was ELECTRIC SHOCKon the CPU. And on some other SMPS's not. The earthing of my home is well. The why?


----------



## Mahesh Babu (Jul 26, 2005)

Get celeron 
AMD sucks


----------



## deathvirus_me (Jul 26, 2005)

*What ??????* .... U'r actually voting a Celron over a Athlon/Sempron ??????


----------



## nishantv2003 (Jul 26, 2005)

Mahesh Babu tum ee keya kahaa rahee hoo bhai.
and
readermaniax
Go for 939 pin Athlon 3000+ or above
mobo-asus or msi
ram-corsair 512x2 400fsb or kingston
graphics-deathvirus_me will tell u better
hdd-segate or samsung 80gb or more SATA.
cd/dvd rom/writer-sony or liton.
hope this helps


----------



## pimpom (Jul 26, 2005)

Let me try to clear up a few points before going into detailed suggestions :

There are three different generations of Athlon -
Athlon - contemporary of P3 and early P4. Discontinued years ago.
Athlon XP - Revved-up version of Athlon. Surpassed P4 in most applications. Discontinued more recently.
Athlon 64 - The 64-bit processor. Currently riding high and mighty. Comes in Socket 754 and Socket 939.

Duron - Cut-down economy version of Athlon and Athlon XP. Lower cache and FSB but good value. Discontinued some time ago.

Sempron - Current economy version. Successor to Duron. Comes in Socket A and Socket 754. Both versions are 32-bit. Good VFM but not compatible with future 64-bit softwares.


----------



## Mahesh Babu (Jul 27, 2005)

arey bhai kitne baar bolu?
celeron beats AMD sempron in every department 
They give exactly the same performance but celeron processors run very smooth and don't overheat.Also remember they are much cheaper and gives good price to performance ratio.Im really very impressed with it.I really had a very bad time with AMD sempron 2400 and it sucks especially when encoding movies or doing any high memory consuming work like photoshop.
No more arguments over this please.

*anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=2093

*anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=2093&p=9


----------



## krishnathelord (Jul 27, 2005)

though most tests prove the amd athlon 64 are better than intel pentium prescott or EE, but as time passess the the actual processing capacity of the amd pro decreases and that's a fact which amd user tell after using the comp for year or two


----------



## Mahesh Babu (Jul 27, 2005)

krishnathelord said:
			
		

> though most tests prove the amd athlon 64 are better than intel pentium prescott or EE, but as time passess the the actual processing capacity of the amd pro decreases and that's a fact which amd user tell after using the comp for year or two


Have you experienced this?
Stop posting ******* posts.
How can you say that AMD processing capability decreases after using for one year or so???This is damn ridiculous post.Shame on you.It may have happened with one or two in 10000 people, but that doesn't mean that it implies to all AMD processors.


----------



## deathvirus_me (Jul 27, 2005)

AMD Athlon64/Sempron will always be better in gaming ..... Pentium/Celeron will be better in professional applications b'coz of their raw speed ..... And as far as i know ... anyone will vote a sempron (equivalent to a barton core athlonxp) over a celeron (not celeronD) anyday .... 

A pentium processor will surely shine in games like HL2 ... coz those require hgiher clocked processors .... but thats all .......


----------



## darklord (Jul 27, 2005)

@ Mahesh Babu,
Could you please tell me which model of Celeron model is exactly cheaper than the Sempron 2200+ ?

Sempron 2200 is the cheapest available CPU in the market right now and it is in no way slow considering the price it comes at.

Also Sempron is nothing but  a revised Athlon XP with Tbred core.
Everybody knows how good the AthlonXp was,isnt it ?


----------



## cvvikram (Jul 27, 2005)

you better  go for AMD 64..... bit it is really good and best compared to celeron and all other stuffs.


----------



## Mahesh Babu (Jul 27, 2005)

darklord said:
			
		

> @ Mahesh Babu,
> Could you please tell me which model of Celeron model is exactly cheaper than the Sempron 2200+ ?
> 
> Sempron 2200 is the cheapest available CPU in the market right now and it is in no way slow considering the price it comes at.
> ...



I also know tha Athlon XP is a good processor but have u ever experienced the power of Celeron D?Man its way much faster and stable than Sempron.And forget about 2200 model as they are no longer being manufactured.
Intel Celeron D processor 2.66Ghz is available at 2700Rs and beats AMD 2600+(which costs Rs 3800) in every department.Its the best economic solution for a desktop gaming PC.The best part is that they never tend to overheat and the performance is much better than AMD Sempron.
I never had experience AMD 64bit processors but sempron sucks compared to celeron D.

Anyway go for AMD64bit processors if u want to get rocksolid Processor and future proof.

Follow this order ,
1.AMD 64 bit
2.Pentium 4
3.Celeron D
4.Sempron


----------



## cybershastri (Jul 27, 2005)

A decent rig for a gamer would be...

Athlon64 3000 venice
Asus A8N-E motherboard
GeForce 6600GT
512x2 RAM

all other components depends upon your choice.


----------



## Keith Sebastian (Jul 27, 2005)

If you're on a budget and need to chose between AMD Sempron and Intel Celero D, go get the Celeron. It's the current best budget processor.

I have posted a few links (on comparisons) in another post about Sempron vs Celeron D. Search and read.

-Keith


----------



## dOm1naTOr (Jul 28, 2005)

I owned a celeron 1.7 GHz earlier nd I got them fried with one of my mistake I bought a new sempron 2600+@1.83Ghz. It is hell of the best than the celeron especially in games. Sempron along with a good mobo(MSi or Asus only) would surely beat Celeron D. Sempron performs worst with low quality mobos like Mercury etc nd most people run them underclocked. Under default setings my CPU ran @1.1 Ghz but after I read the manual nd tweaked it , it touched 1.83.


----------



## Mahesh Babu (Jul 28, 2005)

We are talking of Celeron D processors not the old Celeron processors  .
The default setting of Sempron 2400 for me was 1.66Ghz on my ASUS mobo but after changing the DSW switch settings I got  2Ghz but the  performance difference is not that much.Still Celeron D performance is way ahead of Sempron.For example while working with applications like Photoshop the Sempron processor f*cked me up.The performance was not smooth at all.This is where Celeron D is simply superb.For games both the processors perform good tho Celeron D has much smoother performance.
Hello Hello Hello sunayi deraha ki nahi ? Wake up man Wake up this is 2005 forget sempron and get Celeron D processors for the best economic solution.


----------



## Keith Sebastian (Jul 28, 2005)

There's no scope for argument here. Even a die hard AMD fan like me will agree Celeron D outperforms Sempron. Remember, synthetic benchmarks rarely mirror real world performance.

Keith


----------



## indro (Jul 28, 2005)

Yes well all agree that the Celeron D processor is better than AMD sempron , But i have some point to make out in this - 

First the date of this anandtech review was - "June 24th, 2004" 

Secondly , the benchmarks which are shown here are the same benchmarks that we used to see in the 2002 days ,when Athlon XP was AMD 's flagship processor .

See AMD's XP core , which the socket A uses all had the problem in getting lesser performance in Gaming , but good in encoding and Content Creation etc . Thats been proved long time back , only in gaming , A-XP's had this adv in UT game engines , 

So this was a point in history when AMD was slowly catching up with P4 Northwoods , But all the reviews from the community at the time recomended the 3.0GHZ p4C as the best for gaming .

So in contrast to that , 

Here the comparison has been done with the same AXP core and northwood core in Celerons , End result  - The Same , But still  the benchmarks says the celerons to be faster , but how much difference does it have with the AMD's , does it have the same difference as the latest A64's has over P4's  ? 

Somewhere in this forum it was also mentioned that its "2005" and now the celerons are better , Hello ? Sempron 3100+ is a A64 core , compare that  , compare a sempron 3300+ with 64 BIT extentions .

BTW , comparing to A64's the prescotts are steam engines , and  "POwerSucker " 

See , i have posted about the before and i am telling it again ,there are some people who if had a AMD , had some kind of a problem , will blame the processor for not prforming well .If it would had been a Intel ,who have blamed something else for that "Reduced Performance" in time.

So thats how "Ironic" some people are ... Thats the way it is . ! 

Not to mention , a Celeron D processor @ 2.8 ghz should really be compared to a Sempron 2800+ ,really its a shame with what AMD has to offer with 4 yr old parts 

Isnt it a "stupid" conversation to talk about , anyways ?  :d 

"Stupid" - Someone who has to look up "stupid" in the dictionary because they don't know what it means.    , _source - www.urbandictionary.com_

Cheers !


----------



## deathvirus_me (Jul 29, 2005)

> We are talking of Celeron D processors not the old Celeron processors



@ Mahesh BAbu ...: Where did you see the thread starter mention CeleronD processors ????? I think he wanted a comparison between Athlon , Duron and Celeron !!!!!!!!!


----------



## infra_red_dude (Jul 29, 2005)

well it all boils down to the kind of work that you want the processor to do and this will be the deciding the factor for the purchase. 

the thread started wanted a comparison b/w athlon,duron and celeron and as of today the flavors that these models come in are athlon64, sempron (64bit) and celeron d. 

so while a sempron (64) might be faster in some genere of apps the celeron d may be able to beat its hands down is some others! and of corz an A64 is the king between the three. basically what i feel is that there can be no comparison between any two procesors. coz if one is in the elite list for a certain task and other is elite in some other task! so better would be to kno ur requirements and then decide on the processor.


----------

