Out of the Loop

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips (More info?)

Ok, it’s been about 3 years since I put a system together. I remember
the Athlon, Athlon XP, Duron, and Thunderbird, but what on earth is a
Sempron chip? Where does it fall in line at? I assume the Athlon XP’s
are still top of the lne for AMD but where does the Sempron fall?

--
Posted using the http://www.hardwareforumz.com interface, at author's request
Articles individually checked for conformance to usenet standards
Topic URL: http://www.hardwareforumz.com/Chips-Loop-ftopict62401.html
Visit Topic URL to contact author (reg. req'd). Report abuse: http://www.hardwareforumz.com/eform.php?p=314272

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips (More info?)

On 22 Sep 2005 01:36:02 -0400, Trashdog <UseLinkToEmail@HardwareForumz.com>
wrote:

>Ok, it’s been about 3 years since I put a system together. I remember
>the Athlon, Athlon XP, Duron, and Thunderbird, but what on earth is a
>Sempron chip? Where does it fall in line at? I assume the Athlon XP’s
>are still top of the lne for AMD but where does the Sempron fall?

No Athlon XP is long surpassed as AMD's top of the line - for 2 years now
we've had the Athlon64... available currently in socket 754 and 939 configs
with single and dual channel memory controllers respectively. More
recently there are dual core versions. Sorting out which one to buy can be
confusing: e.g. the Athlon64 3500+ has been available over the past year
based on no less than 5 different cores. Take a look here for a summary:
http://www.c627627.com/AMD/Athlon64/

The Sempron fills a similar market slot to Duron and Intel's Celeron, i.e.
the "value" end though it is also confusing in that Sempron has been
applied to both low-end Athlon XPs for socket A and, more recently, low-end
Athlon64s for socket 754. It's been said here that if you take the Sempron
model number and knock off 400MHz, that'll be its approximate equivalent
Athlon64 performance. It's basically a chip for the OEM market to offer
product differentiation; I see no reason for a DIYer to consider it unless
they're really hard up.

--
Rgds, George Macdonald

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips (More info?)

On 22 Sep 2005 01:36:02 -0400, Trashdog
<UseLinkToEmail@HardwareForumz.com> wrote:

>Ok, it’s been about 3 years since I put a system together. I remember
>the Athlon, Athlon XP, Duron, and Thunderbird, but what on earth is a
>Sempron chip? Where does it fall in line at? I assume the Athlon XP’s
>are still top of the lne for AMD but where does the Sempron fall?

The Duron marketing name is no more and the Sempron name replaced it.
The chips themselves are different (some are actually identical to
AthlonXP chips), but it's filling the same price-point.

As for the AthlonXP, it's pretty outdated now and all but
discontinued. The Athlon64 and it's derivatives are top-dog now. The
Athlon64 comes in 3 varieties now, the plain-standard Athlon64 which
offers 64-bit capabilities, integrated memory controller and a number
of performance enhancements over the AthlonXP. These are available in
the older single memory channel "Socket 754" version and the newer
(not really worthwhile anymore IMO), dual channel memory "Socket 939"
version.

The next variety is the Athlon64 FX, which is basically just a bigger
and badder Athlon64 (either higher clock speed or more cache than the
standard model). Unfortunately it does so with a rather large price
tag, only for those with deep pockets. Still, it is the fastest
single-core x86 processor out there.

The last and, IMO, most interesting version is the Athlon64 X2
dual-core processors. These chips have two Athlon64 processing cores
in a single package. Their core speed isn't quite as high as the
Athlon64 FX chips, but having two processors in one more than makes up
for it in my opinion.

As for the Sempron's, right now they come in two varieties. One, as I
mentioned above, is physically identical to old AthlonXP chips, just
with a different numbering scheme (ie a Sempron 3000+ is basically the
same as an AthlonXP 2600+). The other a small-cache version of the
Socket 754 Athlon64, often with the 64-bit capabilities disabled.

-------------
Tony Hill
hilla <underscore> 20 <at> yahoo <dot> ca

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips (More info?)

Trashdog wrote:
> Ok, it’s been about 3 years since I put a system together. I remember
> the Athlon, Athlon XP, Duron, and Thunderbird, but what on earth is a
> Sempron chip? Where does it fall in line at? I assume the Athlon XP’s
> are still top of the lne for AMD but where does the Sempron fall?
>

Duron has now become Sempron.

Athlon XP has now become Athlon 64.

Those of course are their market positionings.

Yousuf Khan

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips (More info?)

Tony Hill wrote:

>The Athlon64 and it's derivatives are top-dog now. The
>Athlon64 comes in 3 varieties now, the plain-standard Athlon64 which
>offers 64-bit capabilities, integrated memory controller and a number
>of performance enhancements over the AthlonXP. These are available in
>the older single memory channel "Socket 754" version and the newer
>(not really worthwhile anymore IMO), dual channel memory "Socket 939"
>version.

What? Socket 939 "not worthwhile anymore"? What's better?

 

[koko]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips (More info?)

On Fri, 23 Sep 2005 14:04:38 +0200, Yousuf Khan <bbbl67@ezrs.com> wrote:

> Duron has now become Sempron.
> Athlon XP has now become Athlon 64.
>
> Those of course are their market positionings.

and in the real world
Athlon XP was renamed to Sempron
later on Athlon 64 was modified(cache) to became Sempron

--
taa

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips (More info?)

On Fri, 23 Sep 2005 08:06:43 -0500, chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid>
wrote:

>Tony Hill wrote:
>
>>The Athlon64 and it's derivatives are top-dog now. The
>>Athlon64 comes in 3 varieties now, the plain-standard Athlon64 which
>>offers 64-bit capabilities, integrated memory controller and a number
>>of performance enhancements over the AthlonXP. These are available in
>>the older single memory channel "Socket 754" version and the newer
>>(not really worthwhile anymore IMO), dual channel memory "Socket 939"
>>version.
>
>What? Socket 939 "not worthwhile anymore"? What's better?

LOL! I gotta work on connecting my brain to my fingers a bit better
before posting! I was referring to the Socket 754 Athlon64 chips as
not being particularly worthwhile anymore.

Socket 939 chips are, of course, the latest and greatest for AMD.

-------------
Tony Hill
hilla <underscore> 20 <at> yahoo <dot> ca