AMD 2500+ Socket A CPUs Compared
SuperPuppy writes "Hardcoreware.net has
rounded up
three 2500+ Socket A processors from AMD. An AthlonXP, based on the Barton core
(this particular one predates the locked multipliers we've been seeing lately),
a Mobile Athlon, based on the Barton SOI, and the new Sempron, which is based
on the Tbred core. Each processor differs in clock frequency and cache size, but most
importantly, the Mobile Athlon takes up a LOT less juice than either of the
other two, and is therefore a remarkable performer in terms of overclocking. The
Sempron was quite disappointing on all fronts but price."
In general, The need for new CPU's has stagnated in the last year or so. What can't you do with a 2.4Ghz HT Intel CPU? The "bleeding edge" isn't as far ahead as it used to be. What do you guys think will be the next revolution in the CPU (or GPU, for that matter) market?
The Barton 2500+ is probably the best chip that AMD have ever released. It was cheap, it performed well, and it was an overclocker's dream. It's not at all uncommon to find many people who have a 2500+ and have overclocked it to 3200+ speeds with nothing more than a stock cooler, without crashing.
The Semprons, however, are rather lacklustre, and I'm nto sure why they released them for the Socket A platform... the XP's are the same price and perform better. The only Sempron anyone would be remotely interested in is the Socket 754 Sempron 3000+, which gves the same performance as an Athlon 64 2800+, but without the 64bit compatability (i.e. no Windows XP 64 edition).