Upgrade path for Sempron 3000 32-bit

[tlai909]

I have the above. Generally happy with the performance.

However in the future I'd like a Turion of some sort.

The ML34 sounds decent at 1.8 GHz and 1Mb cache.

However I don't think it'll be a huge performance increase over the
already 1.8GHz Sempron.

What about an ML30 which is 'only' 1.6GHz (1Mb cache)?

Am I going backwards?

 

[tlai909]

Also I'd like to add that I have a Compaq V2000Z which is a ATI RS480,
SB400 unit.

Does it support MT processors as well?

These are 25w vs. 35w - same performance, less heat.

 

[tlai909]

I seem to be answering my own posts here.

I have a Compaq v2000z equivalent.

I'm am reasonably happy with the Sempron 3000... it's certainly nothing
near my Opteron or XP-M machines.

I found out the v2000z supports MT processors fine. In fact the MT34
types are faster and they use less power and are 64-bit.

 

[Tony Hill]

I have the above. Generally happy with the performance.

However in the future I'd like a Turion of some sort.

The ML34 sounds decent at 1.8 GHz and 1Mb cache.

However I don't think it'll be a huge performance increase over the
already 1.8GHz Sempron.

There won't be. You'll probably struggle to even notice the
difference. Not particularly worthwhile unless you've got a lot of
money burning a hole in your pocket.

What about an ML30 which is 'only' 1.6GHz (1Mb cache)?

Am I going backwards?

Some applications will probably be faster on your Sempron, some will
be faster on the Turion ML30. Either way it's definitely not a
worthwhile upgrade.

Really, even the top-end Turion ML-37 (highest processor listed as
being supported by your Compaq V2000z laptop), at 2.0GHz and 1MB of L2
cache, is probably not going to be a noticeable upgrade most of the
time, just not worth the money unless you're really desperate for a
small extra boost. Going from 1.8GHz/128KB of cache up to 2.0GHz/1MB
of cache is probably going to get you between a 20 and 30% boost in
performance. Now consider that a 20% boost in performance is about
the minimum you're likely to notice in day-to-day use, this really
doesn't work out to a very substantial upgrade, especially not with
the ~$250 price tag.

There are two things that you could do that might improve the
performance of your system though. First, upgrading your memory to
1GB if you don't already have as much. If you're applications are
really memory hungry then 2GB (most the laptop will support at this
time) might be worthwhile. The second upgrade would be to get a
5400rpm or even a 7200rpm hard drive for that laptop. If you
currently have a 4200rpm/2MB cache (or even 5400rpm/2MB cache) drive,
as is common on this system, then the upgrade to a 7200rpm/8MB cache
hard drive is probably going to be more noticeable than going from
your Sempron 3000+ 1.8GHz/128KB chip to a Turion ML-37 2.0GHz/1MB
chip. Where the processor upgrade will cost you ~$250, the hard drive
upgrade might cost you half as much.

 

[tlai909]

Tony, thanks for your response. I am also a Tony.

I currently have 768Mb (256Mb included, 512Mb Hynix upgrade) - this is
a MUST do upgrade in my opinion. It struggles with only 224Mb (minus
32Mb shared).

I have 736Mb + 32Mb video shared and performance is sparkling for what
I'm using it for.

I also have a 60Gb 7,200rpm drive in there (the standard 4,200rpm job
will be tossed into a USB case).

This drive walks all over the 4,200rpm units but it is twice the cost!

Unfortunately it looks like the AMD made the Sempron 3000 too good.

I only lack 64-bit which is a waste with what I am doing. I doubt I
will run XP64 on it... Vista maybe.

I am also quite pleased with the performance of the XPress 200m. It is
much less sucky than I thought it would be and it is MILES ahead of a
Extreme 2.

I am overall quite happy with the 'laptop that ATI built', ATI RS480,
SB400, XPress200m.

If the MT-34 or whatever gets cheap enough I may consider it if Vista
is a compelling updgrade.

 

[Tony Hill]

Tony, thanks for your response. I am also a Tony.

I currently have 768Mb (256Mb included, 512Mb Hynix upgrade) - this is
a MUST do upgrade in my opinion. It struggles with only 224Mb (minus
32Mb shared).

I have 736Mb + 32Mb video shared and performance is sparkling for what
I'm using it for.

I also have a 60Gb 7,200rpm drive in there (the standard 4,200rpm job
will be tossed into a USB case).

This drive walks all over the 4,200rpm units but it is twice the cost!

Unfortunately it looks like the AMD made the Sempron 3000 too good.

More to the point is that the Turion chips aren't quite good enough.
The Semprons are designed to compete with Intel's Celeron-M and
Celeron-D chips, and they tromp all over them as much as AMD's
Athlon64 chips tromp all over the Pentium 4. Unfortunately they just
couldn't get too much more performance at the same power consumption
in the Turion64 chips. As such, the Turion vs. Pentium-M battle is
MUCH closer with the edge probably going to Intel.

I only lack 64-bit which is a waste with what I am doing. I doubt I
will run XP64 on it... Vista maybe.

Unless you work with large amounts of virtual memory then 64-bit
support probably isn't worthwhile. Performance should be roughly the
same between 32-bit x86 code and 64-bit x86-64 code, so really the
memory addressing is the only major advantage.

I am also quite pleased with the performance of the XPress 200m. It is
much less sucky than I thought it would be and it is MILES ahead of a
Extreme 2.

That's not overly surprising. Despite being the #1 manufacturer of
video chipsets, Intel still hasn't really figured out how to build
good video. ATI and nVidia are still well ahead in this regards, even
within the limitations of integrated video. Intel's cheaper though,
hence their large market share.

I am overall quite happy with the 'laptop that ATI built', ATI RS480,
SB400, XPress200m.

If the MT-34 or whatever gets cheap enough I may consider it if Vista
is a compelling updgrade.

That's a reasonable decision. Given that it'll probably be ~2010 by
the time Vista finally makes it here there will likely be something
even better available :>