AMD Semperon v Intel Celeron

[jamesgoddard]

In a few previous threads I have tried to stick up for the Intel Celeron D, as I believe it offers good bang for buck performance v it's main competitor the AMD Semperon, only to be shouted down by the AMD fanboys. So I have a simple challenge to the AMD lovers out there, beat the following Super Pi score with a semperon.

Celeron D 356 @ 4.5GHz (note stock cooling - no additional expense required) = Super Pi 1M @ 32 seconds.

Note – I do not care about C2D or Athlon 64’s in this thread – I know they will beat it, but neither of them cost the £45 I managed to pick up this Celeron for. For the price I paid – I don’t think I can be beaten.

Also, one last thing, this is the speed the CPU is 100% stable at, I did managed to get a result at 4.75GHz of 30 seconds, but the system was being a little unstable at that speed, I suppose I have found the limit of the stock cooling there…

 

[tool_462]

Once I get my water kit purchased (still debating) and set up. I want to see if I can pick up a really cheap 351 or so Celeron D. Just to mess around with OCing I would like to see 5Ghz on my screen just for fun.

 

[Flopmouth_Fish]

I don't have a Sempron, nor do I overclock, but I will say that that's a very impressive overclock. You should try aftermarket cooling; you should be able to break 5GHz and 30 second SuperPi.

 

[Flopmouth_Fish]

Once I get my water kit purchased (still debating) and set up. I want to see if I can pick up a really cheap 351 or so Celeron D. Just to mess around with OCing I would like to see 5Ghz on my screen just for fun.

Maybe you should just get a 9-series Pentium D.

 

[m25]

Impressive, but could you also show a CPUZ validation?! Don't take me wrong but I know pretty much about Photoshop and GIMP to 100% trust screenshots

I believe it offers good bang for buck performance v it's main competitor the AMD Semperon, only to be shouted down by the AMD fanboys

(ON STOCK)It's above all the benchmarks that show the Sempron superiority, just take a look at them. Personally have tried both and sincerely; CeleronDs lag, especially in multitasking they're even worse than older Northwood based Celerons. And, humming recod apart, how long do you expect it to live that way?

 

[monkeymanuk]

The term 'nob cheese' springs to mind!

I guess you find calculating PI very interesting, I wonder what useful purpose it serves you during your day?

Why dont you really go for it and run Prime95 for a week or two

WGAS?

 

[melarcky]

ok well i will say a few things...
1.)i am no intel or amd fan boy
2.) very nice over clock and yes you should get better cooling
3.) i had a sempron 2200+ before i got this CPU and it was great... i played games, used photoshop, even some Sony Vegas and it worked great for me.
My friend on the other hand had a Celeron 1.8Ghz Clocked at 2.2Ghz and it wasnt as good as my Sempron.. now ofcourse i am talking about AMD Socket (A) 462 and Intel Socket 478. but after all they are still Semprons and Celerons
4.) what is SuperPi ?

 

[jamesgoddard]

Impressive, but could you also show a CPUZ validation?!

http://valid.x86-secret.com/show_oc?id=127618

 

[melarcky]

Is a Celeron D Dual core? if not why the FU@# call it a Celeron D? doesnt D stand for Dual Core?

 

[jamesgoddard]

ok well i will say a few things...
1.)i am no intel or amd fan boy
2.) very nice over clock and yes you should get better cooling
3.) i had a sempron 2200+ before i got this CPU and it was great... i played games, used photoshop, even some Sony Vegas and it worked great for me.
My friend on the other hand had a Celeron 1.8Ghz Clocked at 2.2Ghz and it wasnt as good as my Sempron.. now ofcourse i am talking about AMD Socket (A) 462 and Intel Socket 478. but after all they are still Semprons and Celerons
4.) what is SuperPi ?

1) nor am I - in fact I like AMD - but I like ATI better (odd world huh)
2) it's not that special an OC tbh - I have seen people posting 6GHz with Cele Ds.. Spending on an aftermarket cooler ATM is missing the point - I am waiting for C2Q to arrive - then I will look into what's around
3) the thing about the old celes were they were cache crippled - where the 351 and up have 512k, they are better back per clock
4) Give me something else to try then that only measures core (CPU and memory) performance

 

[jamesgoddard]

Is a Celeron D Dual core? if not why the FU@# call it a Celeron D? doesnt D stand for Dual Core?

no it's not... the D stands for intel fooling Da simple customer

 

[drcroubie]

Nice result with the 4.5 Overclock! What's it get on default values though? (and like someone said, it is >2 hour prime-stable?) Would like to know what's best for people who can't overclock...

Just some results from my recent testing:

Athlon 3800 X2 / M2NSLI / Corsair (2*1gb) Twin2x5400C4 - 1mil = 42seconds (default everything, yes it's an athlon, just for comparison)

Sempron 3000 / M2NPV-VM / Corsair (2*512) VS5300 - 1mil = 52seconds (fsb 208 *8=1664 to get the ram up to 1664/5=332.8. Can't get it past fsb215, no VCore control, might try overclockage on my m2nsli on the weekend)

Celeron Tualatin 1100 @ 1466 / 2*128 PC133 - 1mil = 2min33seconds

Celeron 2.4GHz Northwood Mobile (dell inspiron 1150) / 2*256 pc2100 (although spd says pc2700) - 1mil = 2min50seconds (yes, worse than a tualeron, damn netburst crap)

 

[melarcky]

Is a Celeron D Dual core? if not why the FU@# call it a Celeron D? doesnt D stand for Dual Core?

no it's not... the D stands for intel fooling Da simple customer
well thanks for the info... that just anoys the FU#$ out of me when intel/AMD NVIDIA/ATI do those screwed up names in there products such as 6800xt

 

[jamesgoddard]

What's it get on default values though? Would like to know what's best for people who can't overclock...

42 seconds - just tested

 

[jamesgoddard]

prime95 running - off to bed now - see you tommorow!

 

[jamesgoddard]

7 hours prime @4.5GHz - no errors

 

[weskurtz81]

I understand what you are saying, and for you the Celeron D might be a great deal since you can over clock it. But if you search a little you will see that some of the least expensive semprons will break 3ghz, and at that speed they should at least tie the Celeron D which you are speaking of. The sempron I am speaking of is the 2800 Palermo, and just about all the Palermo cores can hit anywhere from 3.0-3.3Ghz(3.3 being rare). But I think the real issue is how good these cpu's for the average person which would be buying it. Those people leave them at stock settings, and either can't or do not know how to overclock them. In those cases the semprons will be a better choice than the Celeron D in most cases(my opionion). But back to the Super PI discussion, I have seen benchmarks of a 2.8ghz sempron completing super pi 1M in 33seconds. So I would imagine a 3ghz sempron would be at least as low as 32. That's about it really, I know the Celeron D's are much much better than the older Celerons, but I still beleive that the Semprons clock for clock are better CPU's and the latest Sempron cores overclock very well.

EDIT: I would also be more concerned with real world performance benchmarks than super pi. But IMO, both are pretty good cpu's and extremely affordable. I would not have purchased one of the old celeries, they are horrible..... but the new ones are definately a much better value CPU.

 

[m25]

Exactly, it was what I was trying to explain. Semprons are better than celerons/celeronDs, especially on stock. A 1.6G sempron can perform up to 20% better than a 2.6GHz CeleronD. I was especially amazed by the extremely low multitasking performance; put 2 programs to work togeather and you get a pretty lengthy lockup switching from one to the other. Here they perform even worse than older celerons because the hyperpipelined Prescott crap can't keep up,even with 256 or 512K L2.

 

[1Tanker]

I understand what you are saying, and for you the Celeron D might be a great deal since you can over clock it. But if you search a little you will see that some of the least expensive semprons will break 3ghz, and at that speed they should at least tie the Celeron D which you are speaking of. The sempron I am speaking of is the 2800 Palermo, and just about all the Palermo cores can hit anywhere from 3.0-3.3Ghz(3.3 being rare). But I think the real issue is how good these cpu's for the average person which would be buying it. Those people leave them at stock settings, and either can't or do not know how to overclock them. In those cases the semprons will be a better choice than the Celeron D in most cases(my opionion). But back to the Super PI discussion, I have seen benchmarks of a 2.8ghz sempron completing super pi 1M in 33seconds. So I would imagine a 3ghz sempron would be at least as low as 32. That's about it really, I know the Celeron D's are much much better than the older Celerons, but I still beleive that the Semprons clock for clock are better CPU's and the latest Sempron cores overclock very well.

EDIT: I would also be more concerned with real world performance benchmarks than super pi. But IMO, both are pretty good cpu's and extremely affordable. I would not have purchased one of the old celeries, they are horrible..... but the new ones are definately a much better value CPU.

Proof of this, i have to see. 2.4-2.5 (~300HT)tops, without crazy cooling. 375HTx8=3GHz. That's about as likely as getting 6GHz+ with the Celeron.

 

[m25]

http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/sempron-2600_7.html
(and it's older socket 754, AM2 semprons OC as well as Athlons and many people run them 2.6-2.8G).

 

[joefriday]

I understand what you are saying, and for you the Celeron D might be a great deal since you can over clock it. But if you search a little you will see that some of the least expensive semprons will break 3ghz, and at that speed they should at least tie the Celeron D which you are speaking of. The sempron I am speaking of is the 2800 Palermo, and just about all the Palermo cores can hit anywhere from 3.0-3.3Ghz(3.3 being rare). But I think the real issue is how good these cpu's for the average person which would be buying it. Those people leave them at stock settings, and either can't or do not know how to overclock them. In those cases the semprons will be a better choice than the Celeron D in most cases(my opionion). But back to the Super PI discussion, I have seen benchmarks of a 2.8ghz sempron completing super pi 1M in 33seconds. So I would imagine a 3ghz sempron would be at least as low as 32. That's about it really, I know the Celeron D's are much much better than the older Celerons, but I still beleive that the Semprons clock for clock are better CPU's and the latest Sempron cores overclock very well.

EDIT: I would also be more concerned with real world performance benchmarks than super pi. But IMO, both are pretty good cpu's and extremely affordable. I would not have purchased one of the old celeries, they are horrible..... but the new ones are definately a much better value CPU.

I have to call BS on the 2800 palermo overclocking. Having owned one, and using arguably one of the best boards to overclock a socket 754 cpu with (Biostar T-Force 6100), I was able to get my 2800 up to 2.5 GHz @ 1.55v. I could get all the way up to 2.7GHz, but that took an unrealistic 1.8 volts. I have a friend who has overclocked 4 of these 2800 palermos, all using the T-Force board, and the best one so far was a chip that could hit 2.7GHz at 1.5 volts. Stock cooling was the only thing used. 3 GHz is damn-near impossible on these chips, and 3.3GHz is a myth until you provide a link to someone actually hitting that mark.

 

[edwuave]

ya. the celeron D is a crappy processor, got one in my study room, cant stop complaining when i started to open multiple programs; corel draw, ofiice word, mozilla firefox....not much difference after overclock to 3.0GHz, i might as well get an AM2 sempron.

 

[1Tanker]

http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/sempron-2600_7.html
(and it's older socket 754, AM2 semprons OC as well as Athlons and many people run them 2.6-2.8G).

I've read that article before. They get it to 2.5GHz, and the Celeron to 3.4. I asked for proof about overclocking a 2800+ Sempron to 3GHz+. :roll:

 

[Slobogob]

Once I get my water kit purchased (still debating) and set up. I want to see if I can pick up a really cheap 351 or so Celeron D. Just to mess around with OCing I would like to see 5Ghz on my screen just for fun.

If you buy a Celeron make sure it is a Cedar Mill Core (65nm, ie 352, 356 etc). If you buy a 351... well, then i´ll have to... do... something bad. :twisted:

 

[m25]

http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/sempron-2600_7.html
(and it's older socket 754, AM2 semprons OC as well as Athlons and many people run them 2.6-2.8G).

I've read that article before. They get it to 2.5GHz, and the Celeron to 3.4. I asked for proof about overclocking a 2800+ Sempron to 3GHz+. :roll:
You don't need to send it to 3G; say the mythic 4G OC is 50% of a 2.67GHz CeleronD, while 2.5GHz is 56% over the standard 1.6G of A sempron 2600+, so the Sempron is still a better OC-er.