XP or Sempron?

[Bobo]

1. Gotta love them dumb ones ... any sempron will destroy any of the Athlon series hands down -- think carefully if you decide to refute this.

Then why do you have an Athlon? And how come Athlons are more expensive? And how come they are higher on the benchmarks??????

 

[Bobo]

except the athlon64 surely?

I thought the Athlon 64 was the only athlon, guess I'm wrong.

OK, then the semprons are better than the athlons EXCEPT for the 64, like he said.

 

[4W4K3]

So you'd turn down a faster CPU, running a faster core with potentially the same amount of cache?

if it was free, of course not. but because i'd have to buy it, and i dont even use my XP 2.6GHz chip to full potential...why would i need a faster chip?

Then why do you have an Athlon? And how come Athlons are more expensive? And how come they are higher on the benchmarks??????

Athlon is old, they still exist. They don't just dissapear when new stuff comes out.

Athlons are much cheaper than Semprons, can get for under $100.

They aren't higher on benchmarks unless they are unfairly comparing them with a crappy competitor. Only overclocked are they faster, and if you overclock the Sempron jsut as much it will lose then too.

 

[Bobo]

Then why do you have an Athlon? And how come Athlons are more expensive? And how come they are higher on the benchmarks??????

Ooops, I meant Athlon 64

They aren't higher on benchmarks unless they are unfairly comparing them with a crappy competitor. Only overclocked are they faster, and if you overclock the Sempron jsut as much it will lose then too.

I have the Athlon 64 3400, and looking at the benchmarks on Everest, the Athlon 64 3800 is top of the list, and mine is about ten down.

And the 64s are higher than the XPs, but I dont see any Semprons

 

[Praetor]

so in place of a XP2500+, what sempron would you have, preator?

Sempron 3100+

Then why do you have an Athlon? And how come Athlons are more expensive? And how come they are higher on the benchmarks??????

LOL ... maybe I wasnt clear enough or I was too subtle I have a Athlon64. Not an Athlon. I was simply playing semantics.

I thought the Athlon 64 was the only athlon, guess I'm wrong.

Athlon64 = Athlon64. Athlon = Athlon. Again, semantics.

why would I need a faster chip

1. Because its cheaper
2. Because AthlonXPs (for the most part) are much more difficult to procure
3. Hypertransport

Athlons are much cheaper than Semprons, can get for under $100.

Dunno but the Sempron3100s here are about the cost of the 2500-M and Hypertransport alone is enough to convince me

 

[Bobo]

LOL ... maybe I wasnt clear enough or I was too subtle I have a Athlon64. Not an Athlon. I was simply playing semantics.

Athlon64 = Athlon64. Athlon = Athlon. Again, semantics.

Yeah, big oops on my part.

But I meant Athlon 64

 

[4W4K3]

1. Because its cheaper
2. Because AthlonXPs (for the most part) are much more difficult to procure
3. Hypertransport

i guess you just dont understand. i dont NEED a faster chip, i can't afford one, and i wouldn't use one if i had it. there is no "cheaper" if it requires another $0.01 out of my pocket. i have 3 working computers of my own, and 2 of them i just have for kicks lol.

if i needed an A64 rig, and hypertransport for something, yes, it would be a better buy. but because i don't need one, and i already have a working computer that is too fast for me...why upgrade? bragging rights? never interested me...

it's like telling my grandma she needs to upgrade to a $600 XP machine (running on 600E setup). all she does is check her e-mail and chat online...would be a waste of money even if it was faster and better. she couldn't use it to its potential. just like me

 

[Praetor]

i guess you just dont understand

You fail to realize that your comment

i wouldn't be happy at all. i'd rather have my 2.6ghz XP chip than any sempron

Makes no mention of additional costs because of that fancy word "RATHER" so before you suggest that i dont understand that an additional cost is an additional cost, it'd be nice to consider why i was saying what i was saying.

 

[4W4K3]

Makes no mention of additional costs because of that fancy word "RATHER" so before you suggest that i dont understand that an additional cost is an additional cost, it'd be nice to consider why i was saying what i was saying.

"rather" meaning if i had to buy either of them (because we all know computers aren't free) that i would prefer the XP setup because it would be cheaper (my computer today would probably cost...$500?) Maybe less.

And i would want to be able to overclock the setup, so buying the CHEAPEST parts wouldn't be an option (although if it was Sempron setup COULD be cheaper.)

That's what i meant...sorry for the confusion. I might sound argumentative, but I'm just making it clear that when you don't need faster/newer, it is pointless to spend money on better equipment. I would be losing money, and gaining nothing but a bragable system in return. (Really everyone is going for 939 setups. Semprons aren't very popular.)

 

[Praetor]

that I would prefer the XP setup because it would be cheaper

Yeah but thats what I was saying, the AthlonXPs arent always cheaper (especially the mobiless which are usually $10 more)

And I would want to be able to overclock the setup, so buying the CHEAPEST parts wouldn't be an option (although if it was Sempron setup COULD be cheaper.)

With the exception of the 3100 you'd be using the same mobo and stuff.....

That's what I meant...sorry for the confusion. I might sound argumentative

LOL keeps us all sharp

 

[4W4K3]

With the exception of the 3100 you'd be using the same mobo and stuff.....

lol thats the one i would want. upgrading to another socket 462 computer now seems kinda a waste. i'd want to go to A64, and if i did i'm looking for 939 setup. can't now though, in debt

 

[Praetor]

upgrading to another socket 462 computer now seems kinda a waste

Man all this was sparked by the comment you said

i wouldn't be happy at all. i'd rather have my 2.6ghz XP chip than any sempron

For which there wouldnt be any "upgrade"

 

[4W4K3]

For which there wouldnt be any "upgrade"

exactly, i would rather keep my XP machine, or go with a socket 939, than get any Sempron. I wouldn't consider it an upgrade, unless i went with the 3100 (which i don't need right now). This is too confusing...

 

[Praetor]

exactly, I would rather keep my XP machine

Man I think you should start reading over again ... from the perspective of the discussion, you theoretically wouldnt HAVE a computer and so it wouldnt be an UPGRADE but rather a PURCHASE

 

[4W4K3]

Man I think you should start reading over again ... from the perspective of the discussion, you theoretically wouldnt HAVE a computer and so it wouldnt be an UPGRADE but rather a PURCHASE

well if you look at it that way, i would wait till i had the extra ~$70 for the XP setup. A "bottom of the bin" Sempron 462 setup isn't too appealing.

 

[Praetor]

Very true however most Semprons are cheaper (again with the understandable exception of the 3100) than XPs (not to mention XPs are a pain to come across nowadays)

 

[double-dragon]

Sempron 3100+

hmm, there is quite a price difference between the 2500+XP and the 3100+Sempron though, right?
so for the same performance you're just paying more for the sempron

 

[Praetor]

1. Its not the same performance
2. The AthlonXP isnt available where i am now so i dont know but runninng off last known price it was $20CAD more.

AthlonXP 2500
Clock: 1.83GHz
L2: 512K
Core: DDR333

AthlonXP-M 2500
Clock: 1.83GHz
L2: 512K
Core: DDR266

Sempron 3100+
Clock: 2.00GHz
L2: 512K
Core: DDR333 + Hypertransport