Intel Celeron D VS AMD Sempron VS Pentium 4

Discussion in 'Computer Information' started by Iowa883, Mar 7, 2005.

  1. Iowa883

    Iowa883 Guest

    Hey Guys,
    just wondering what is the difference in these processors ? Is there any
    good/bad points about any of them ? How about speed, reliability, or up to
    date technology ?
    I am assuming they are just different/ newer processors.
    I am shopping for a new computer and am looking at Best Buys ad.
    Does anyone know if the one for $449.97 after rebates is any good ? It is an
    compaq with the AMD Sempron 3100 .I beleive it is probablya 1320SR model but
    just guessing.

    I also need to slave my old HD in to it, is there a bay inside to fit it all
    inside and just plug it in ?

    Thanks,
    Iowa883
     
    Iowa883, Mar 7, 2005
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. Iowa883

    bmoag Guest

    Actually I bought that box last week as an emergency replacement for a box
    in my office. It has performed well but I only use it for mainstream
    business apps. I consider it a good bargain so far.

    It has a 3100 Sempron (better than a Celeron, not as good as an AthlonXP or
    Pentium 4), onboard shared video and I believe an empty AGP slot (I hope to
    never need to know for the use I have for this machine). It has several open
    bays but unless Compaq has changed since being bought by HP you are dealing
    with a proprietary Compaq motherboard/chipset and (generally barely
    adequate) proprietary power supply. Hence expandability is limited no matter
    how many empty bays the box may have. It should not be a problem to add a
    hard drive but be prepared for surprises.

    If you want to play hi end 3-d games with all the eye candy, edit video at a
    reasonable speed or work in large files with Photoshop you get the best
    performance from upper end Athlon XP (these are being phased out), P4 and
    (my choice) Athlon64 cpus, a large amount of fast memory and a high end 3d
    video card. Computer prices are dropping like a stone but the high end is
    still pricey. Lower end cpus have less on board cache, slower buses, work
    with slower memory. However none of these things really matter for
    mainstream computer uses and most people would get adequate performance for
    what they do with a 200mHz PIII if WindowsXP wasn't such a bloated sow of an
    OS.
     
    bmoag, Mar 8, 2005
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. Iowa883

    Spajky Guest

    its beter than AthlonXP a bit because of integrated mem controller!
    http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/sempron-3100-oc.html
     
    Spajky, Mar 11, 2005
    #3
  4. Iowa883

    Mathias Guest

    Boring.
     
    Mathias, Mar 11, 2005
    #4
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.