athlon xp vs sempron

[Mr coco bananas]

what is the difference between the athlon xp and the sempron

[Mr. Matt]

Athlon XP is the old high-end processor line for AMD, now replaced by Athlon 64s. Sempron is the new budget processor line for AMD, replacing the Duron. The Sempron, despite being the new value processor, seems to be more efficient than the Athlon XP -- for example, the Athlon XP 2400+ was 2Ghz, but the Sempron 2400+ is only 1.667Ghz.

I haven't really looked into them yet; I'll go find something useful about them. A comparison, maybe.

EDIT: I think Semprons are based on the Thoroughbred-B core, by the way. Which is the same core used by later Athlon XPs (pre-Barton). I'll have a look, though.

EDIT 2: Here's a comparison that suggests that a 2500+ Sempron will not outperform a 2500+ XP. Also points out a few technical differences.

EDIT 3: Alright, I was partially accurate. After reading around, I get the impression that there are at least two versions of the Sempron. The first is based on the good ol' socket-A, based on Thoroughbred-B (Athlon XP) cores.
The second type is a socket-754 processor. It's directly related to the Athlon 64 (K8) processors, but it's been stripped down quite heavily. Despite this relation to the Athlon 64, then, it's still a 32-bit processor. This version comes with some of the perks of the Athlon 64s that the Athlon XP doesn't have, however, for example the socket-754 Sempron is compatible with Cool-'n-Quiet technology and has SSE-2.

EDIT 4: Hopefully the last edit . I found a picture of the two Semprons so you can visually see the difference:



The one on the left is the Sempron based on the old Athlon XP, the Socket-A Sempron. The one on the right is the newer Socket -754 processor, based on the K8 Athlon 64 cores.

EDIT 5: Alright, so it wasn't the last edit. I also found out that the Sempron 3000+ is based on the Barton core.

And I also found out that the rating system (e.g. 2500+) isn't the same scale as the ratings used for Athlon XPs and Athlon 64s. Instead, the ratings are directly based on the clock speeds of Celeron D processors, Intel's new budget processor. So you can't really compare the rating of a Sempron to an Athlon XP like I did earlier.

[Peeping Tom]

(A sempron is comparable to a celeron from Intel)

[Suede-y]

hey guys,
just wanted to say that PC world did some tests on sempron and xp and it said xp is still better then sempron althhough it is newer.

[Monster_user]

Originally Posted by Suede-y

hey guys,
just wanted to say that PC world did some tests on sempron and xp and it said xp is still better then sempron althhough it is newer.

Way to repeat the last 2 posts...

The Celeron from Intel is their Cheapo lowest end, ie. if its slower than this we won't make it. Edit:

Although the GHZ is kept up for appearences sake, it is SLOW.

Pentium III 1.2ghz Score -----------------------------> 5
AMD Athloon 1200 (1ghz? 800mhz?) score ------->5
Celeron 1.2 ghz score --------------------------------->3
Celeron 2.4 ghz score --------------------------------->10
AMD Sempron 2400 ------------------------------------>11
Pentium 4 2.4 ghz score ------------------------------>16
Pentium 4 Exteme 2.4ghz ----------------------------> 20
AMD 64 2400 (1.7ghz?) score ------------------------>17-34 depending on app
AMD 64 Fx 2400 score --------------------------------->21 -42 depending on app
Intel Xeon 64bit 2.4gz---------------------------------> 22-40 depending on app

Although this is not official... and a little biased, but most will agree.

Where as the Sempron is a budget AMD option, for those who can't afford the AMD64. (for clarification of the above posts). It is compared to the Celeron because the systems it is running against are like DELL's systems, which all run Celeron. It isn't being sold for gaming systems, but can run games better than Celerons.

[Smigg]

and apparantly its worth the money getting the xp, because the ammount you pay for the extra speed (not a lot) is worth it.