Should a person go xp athlon or is 64 necessary?

Status
Not open for further replies.
I don't like Semprons. The Celeron D is a very good performer for the budget and unlike the top rated Sempron, it actually offers an upgrade path that doesn't require you to purchase a new motherboard.
 
if that's all you're doing, then a Sempron 3100+ (not sure if they have any lower in socket 754), a Gigabyte K8N Pro, and a Geforce FX5200 will fit your needs well
 
After checking the athlon xp 2800+ is is 142, the xp 64 2800+is 129, and the sempron 2800 is 109. Kind of a no brainer for the little price difference.
 
ingeborgdot said:
After checking the athlon xp 2800+ is is 142, the xp 64 2800+is 129, and the sempron 2800 is 109. Kind of a no brainer for the little price difference.
not trying to attack you, but
it's not an Athlon XP 64, it's either Athlon XP or Athlon 64
 
like i said... the a64 is the way to go... dont listen to these cats... why get a garbage sempron when u can get the a64 for an extra $20?
 
the Sempron's are not "garbage" at all
in reality, you won't notice any difference between it and an Athlon 64 unless you actually do use 64-bit applications, and currently there aren't any

for about a 2% performance difference, people say that a Celeron 2.8 is "crap" compared to a Pentium 4 2.8, and that a Sempron 2800+ is "crap" compared to an Athlon XP or Athlon 64 2800+
for 99% of people, the difference is nothing

now I'm not saying at all that you should not get an Athlon 64 2800+ or 3000+, I'm just saying that a Sempron or Celeron will still do you fine
 
i hear u apok... the only real difference (besides x86-64 compatability) is the fact that the a64 uses hypertransport. which in my opinion is worth the extra $20.

ingeborgdot, a64 does not have anymore protection against a virii than any other processor. virii protection is all software based.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom