Hello everyone,

Now that AMD sells "64-bit enabled Semprons", I am left to wonder:

What are the differences between 90nm "64-bit enabled" 754-pin
Semprons and 90nm 939-pin Athlon 64s?

1. The Sempron's memory controller is single channel while the
Athlon's is dual channel. Is that right?

2. The Athlon comes with 512KB L2 cache (sometimes 1MB for the 4000+
and some dual-cores) while the Sempron comes with 256KB (sometimes
only 128KB??) Is that right?

Are there other differences? Do the latest Semprons (are they also
called revision E?) support SSE3 like Venice cores do?

--
Regards

Yes, right on all counts. You answered your own questions. :-)

Yousuf Khan

I was wondering the same thing, and I'd say go with a S939 system.
There isn't much difference in price between the lowest end Athlon 64
and the highest end Sempron 64. The Semprons only make sense if you get
one of the mid-priced or lower varieties, but then those ones don't
have the 64-bit capability (yet).

Yousuf Khan

On Fri, 05 Aug 2005 00:56:50 +0200, Nudge <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>Hello everyone,
>
>Now that AMD sells "64-bit enabled Semprons", I am left to wonder:
>
>What are the differences between 90nm "64-bit enabled" 754-pin
>Semprons and 90nm 939-pin Athlon 64s?
>
>1. The Sempron's memory controller is single channel while the
>Athlon's is dual channel. Is that right?

Nope. It's a dual-channel controller in the chip, but in Socket 754
form it can only use one channel while in Socket 939 form it uses
dual-channel.

To date the only place I've seen a Socket 939 Sempron sold is in HP's
dx5150 computer, but by all accounts they are on their way.

>2. The Athlon comes with 512KB L2 cache (sometimes 1MB for the 4000+
>and some dual-cores) while the Sempron comes with 256KB (sometimes
>only 128KB??) Is that right?

That is correct.

>Are there other differences? Do the latest Semprons (are they also
>called revision E?) support SSE3 like Venice cores do?

Yes, they do indeed support SSE3 (for what little that's worth). They
also sport the slightly updated memory controller.

-------------
Tony Hill
hilla <underscore> 20 <at> yahoo <dot> ca

YKhan wrote:
> I was wondering the same thing, and I'd say go with a S939 system.
> There isn't much difference in price between the lowest end Athlon 64
> and the highest end Sempron 64. The Semprons only make sense if you get
> one of the mid-priced or lower varieties, but then those ones don't
> have the 64-bit capability (yet).

According to AMD's website, even the low-end Semprons are 64-bit
enabled. I'm taking a hard look at the 2800+ which has the following
characteristics: 1.6 GHz, 256KB L2 cache, FSB333.

(I was unaware S754 Semprons did not (??) support DDR400...
Is that another difference to add to my list? Or is my information
incorrect? I thought FSB333 was for Socket-A Semprons?)

http://www.amd.com/us-en/Corporate/V...04_609,00.html

3400+ (64-bit enabled) $134
3300+ (64-bit enabled) $126
3100+ (64-bit enabled) $106
3000+ (64-bit enabled) $91
2800+ (64-bit enabled) $78
2600+ (64-bit enabled) $64

Where I live, one can buy a Sempron 2800+ for 76 EUR while the
cheapest 90nm S939 A64 i.e. 3000+ costs 138 EUR.

Nudge wrote:
> YKhan wrote:
> > I was wondering the same thing, and I'd say go with a S939 system.
> > There isn't much difference in price between the lowest end Athlon 64
> > and the highest end Sempron 64. The Semprons only make sense if you get
> > one of the mid-priced or lower varieties, but then those ones don't
> > have the 64-bit capability (yet).
>
> According to AMD's website, even the low-end Semprons are 64-bit
> enabled. I'm taking a hard look at the 2800+ which has the following
> characteristics: 1.6 GHz, 256KB L2 cache, FSB333.
>
> (I was unaware S754 Semprons did not (??) support DDR400...
> Is that another difference to add to my list? Or is my information
> incorrect? I thought FSB333 was for Socket-A Semprons?)
>
> http://www.amd.com/us-en/Corporate/V...04_609,00.html
>
> 3400+ (64-bit enabled) $134
> 3300+ (64-bit enabled) $126
> 3100+ (64-bit enabled) $106
> 3000+ (64-bit enabled) $91
> 2800+ (64-bit enabled) $78
> 2600+ (64-bit enabled) $64
>
> Where I live, one can buy a Sempron 2800+ for 76 EUR while the
> cheapest 90nm S939 A64 i.e. 3000+ costs 138 EUR.

good luck finding a 2600+ Sempron which is 64 bit enabled? I would be
weary of a listing of a 64-bit fsb 333, seems someone copied the wrong
description. Also you do not mention if its boxed, or an OEM chip, that
could be the difference in your price. You should be able to pick up a
OEM chip for a good price. Pricewatch does list socket 754 Semprons
boxed for that price, no mention of fsb on the descriptions. Seems that
soon we should be all in 64-bit heaven, no reason not to use one now
with prices like that.

rthoreau

This must be an update, because just a few days ago I was looking
around (though not on the AMD website itself) and it was mentioned that
only the highest end Sempron 3400+ was going to be 64-bit enabled.

I'd say that when you buy the Sempron that you make sure that you
receive the 64-bit one and not the 32-bit one. Also the 2600+ range
seems to be most confusing, there are three models of it, one is a
Socket A, one is a Socket 754 32-bit, and the other is Socket 754
64-bit.

Yousuf Khan

Rthoreau wrote:

> Nudge wrote:
>
>>YKhan wrote:
>>
>>>I was wondering the same thing, and I'd say go with a S939 system.
>>>There isn't much difference in price between the lowest end Athlon 64
>>>and the highest end Sempron 64. The Semprons only make sense if you get
>>>one of the mid-priced or lower varieties, but then those ones don't
>>>have the 64-bit capability (yet).
>>
>>According to AMD's website, even the low-end Semprons are 64-bit
>>enabled. I'm taking a hard look at the 2800+ which has the following
>>characteristics: 1.6 GHz, 256KB L2 cache, FSB333.
>>
>>(I was unaware S754 Semprons did not (??) support DDR400...
>>Is that another difference to add to my list? Or is my information
>>incorrect? I thought FSB333 was for Socket-A Semprons?)
>>
>>http://www.amd.com/us-en/Corporate/V...04_609,00.html
>>
>>3400+ (64-bit enabled) $134
>>3300+ (64-bit enabled) $126
>>3100+ (64-bit enabled) $106
>>3000+ (64-bit enabled) $91
>>2800+ (64-bit enabled) $78
>>2600+ (64-bit enabled) $64
>>
>>Where I live, one can buy a Sempron 2800+ for 76 EUR while the
>>cheapest 90nm S939 A64 i.e. 3000+ costs 138 EUR.
>
>
> good luck finding a 2600+ Sempron which is 64 bit enabled? I would be
> weary of a listing of a 64-bit fsb 333, seems someone copied the wrong
> description. Also you do not mention if its boxed, or an OEM chip, that
> could be the difference in your price. You should be able to pick up a
> OEM chip for a good price. Pricewatch does list socket 754 Semprons
> boxed for that price, no mention of fsb on the descriptions. Seems that
> soon we should be all in 64-bit heaven, no reason not to use one now
> with prices like that.

According to this page:
http://balusc.xs4all.nl/ned/har-cpu-amd-k8.php

All Socket-754 Semprons support FSB400.
Stepping E3 brings SSE3.
Stepping E6 brings AMD64.

Thus, I am looking for... SDA2800BXBOX (E6)

e.g. http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16819104245
$76 at Newegg.

I am still wondering: what king of video card do people put in
Socket-754 systems? Do they go for an expensive MB that supports
PCI-Express, or do they live with an AGP video card, with little
hope to upgrade in the future?

"Nudge" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:42f3f058$0$24307$(E-Mail Removed)...
>
> I am still wondering: what king of video card do people put in
> Socket-754 systems? Do they go for an expensive MB that supports
> PCI-Express, or do they live with an AGP video card, with little
> hope to upgrade in the future?

Video card? Why in the world would I want a video card when I have
built-in video in my K8S-MXs? Are you still buying x387 FPU add-on
chips for your computers? ;-)

Felger Carbon wrote:
> Video card? Why in the world would I want a video card when I have
> built-in video in my K8S-MXs? Are you still buying x387 FPU add-on
> chips for your computers? ;-)

Reminds me of a friend who recently got a motherboard with built in
video. He immediately wanted to get a video card for it. He doesn't
play games, yet he was convinced that he was missing out on some
unknown performance features of a dedicated video card, like a DVI
output. I had to convince him that buying a video card simply for a DVI
output is nuts. So far he seems happy with the built-in video.

Yousuf Khan