Originally posted by septoid2
Why would you ever reccomend a Sempron 3000+? It has half the ram of a 3100+ and is a crappier overclocker as a whole. Assuming this person has no intention/knowledge of overclocking, he'd be screwed. Stick with a s939 Venice 3000+
Cache doesn't make any difference today, given the correct clock speed.
I designed the system assuming he was going to be overclocking
And if you see, you'll notice that it isn't a Sempron, its a Sempron 64. Sempron 64 = Athlon 64 with some of the L2 cache removed. Thats IT. Not to mention...1.8GHz Sempron 64s are hitting 2.8GHz on air and decent voltages. 2.8GHz Sempron 64 = 2.7GHz Athlon 64 = FX-55.
The only downside is that its Socket 754. He wouldn't be "screwed" at all, the Sempron 64 3000+ is the same as an Athlon 64 3000+ (minus the cache ofcourse
). But thats what you get if you're going with a budget build. Especially $600 and below because I built my friend a $570 PC and it has a Sempron 64 3000+, 1GB ValueSelect, 6600GT and all that jazz. He maxes out WoW and plays BF2 at mid-high @ 40fps. His is overclocked to 2.6GHz 24 hours Prime stable @ 1.6v. Temps last I checked were 48*C Load and 33*C Idle with stock cooling.
All that for $570...but this dude won't overclock. I say he's screwed is he DOESN'T overclock.
A 3 GHz Pentium 4 (Athlon 64 3000+) isn't even in the same league as a 4 GHz Pentium 4 (Athlon 64 3000+ @ 2.5GHz).