Sempron 2800
<p class=default>
01:03 PM, April 24, 2006
</p><p>
AMD Sempron 2800+ & 3100+
<br/>
Review by
<u>Jason Jacobs </about/jason/></u>
& Matthew Homan on 7/28/04
<br/>
Sempron Socket A
<u>AMD <http://www.amd.com></u>
has developed a new 32-bit processor, and TechwareLabs has it in the lab for a few rounds
of intensive testing. Named Sempron, it is AMD's answer to the Intel Celeron "D"
processor. This means that we don't expect the Sempron will break any land speed records
for gaming, however, it should handle office applications and workstation duties quite
well. With the processor's target market in mind, we set out to test performance in a wide
range of applications and benchmarks.
<br/>
The test systems were configured as follows:
<br/>
ASUS
<br/>
2 x 256 MB Infineon CL 2.5 DDR
<br/>
AMD Sempron Socket A 2800+
<br/>
Albatron
<br/>
2 x 256 MB Kingston HyperX PC3200 CL 3
<br/>
AMD64 Sempron Socket 754 3100+
<br/>
Intel 865GLC
<br/>
2 x 256 MB Infineon CL 2.5
<br/>
Intel Celeron 2.8 "D"
<br/>
All systems were configured with Windows XP SP1 and Direct X 9.0b on a Western Digital WD8
<br/>
The Sempron should appeal to busniesses looking for mid-range desktop computers, and
consumers building new systems with tight budgets. Check out the Sempron Socket A/462
specifications below:
<br/>
<b>A Word On Cache:</b>
<br/>
Essentially, the Sempron is an Athlon XP with half the cache, which runs at lower
temperatures and higher clock frequencies. The Sempron takes the place of the AMD Duron,
but features twice as much cache as the Durons did. As past discussions have explained,
not all processors benefit the same way from increased cache. An additional 128k of cache
for the Sempron will affect benchmarks differently than would adding 128k of cache on the
Celeron 2.8 or 2.6 "D." The difference is because of the way the to processors handle the
cache.
<br/>
Intel uses a more conventional L1/L2 cache architecture known as an inclusive
architecture. Inclusive caching means that the contents of the L1 cache are also included
in the L2 cache. The affect is that the L2 cache may contain redundant data that the CPU
will not need. This means the CPU has less cache to store data in. As far as the rest of
the system and components are concerned, inclusive caching does not provide additional
benefit.
<br/>
On the flip side are the Athlon XP and Sempron processors, which use the exclusive caching
principle. With exclusive cache, the contents of the L1 are not present in the L2 cache.
The exclusive principle works well for AMD due to the added cost of duplicating 128k in L2
as compared
<br/>
<b>TECH SPECS</b>
:
<br/>
<b>AMD Sempron Processors</b>
: 2200+, 2300+, 2400+, 2500+, 2600+, and 2800+ (SOCKET A)
<br/>
<b>Manufactured</b>
: Fab 30 in Dresden, Germany
<br/>
<b>Process Technology</b>
: 130 nanometer technology
<br/>
<b>Packaging: Socket A</b>
: 2200+, 2300+, 2400+, 2500+, 2600+, and 2800+
<br/>
<b>Types of Memory</b>
: PC1600, PC2100, PC2700 and PC3200 DDR unbuffered memory
<br/>
<b>Front Side Bus (FSB)</b>
: 333 MHz FSB
<br/>
<b>Cache Sizes</b>
: 256K (exclusive) L2 cache; 128KB L1 cache
<br/>
<b>Voltage & Heat Dissipation</b>
: 62W Max
<br/>
<b>Die Size</b>
: 84 mm�
<br/>
<b>Transistors</b>
: approximately 37.5 million
<br/>
<b>Frequency</b>
: 2800+ 2.0GHz, 2600+ 1.833 GHz, 2500+ 1.750 GHz, 2400+ 1.667 GHz, *2300+ 1.583 GHz, and
2200+ 1.5 GHz
<br/>
<b>Chipsets</b>
: NVIDIA, SiS and VIA
<br/>
<b>Motherboards</b>
: ASUS, MSI, Gigabyte, Biostar, Shuttle, ECS, Leadtek, Abit, EP
<br/>
<b>Results</b>
:
<br/>
The 2800+ handled the multimedia results quite well, beating both the P4 chips in the
integer category. The Floading-Point performance of the Sempron 2800+ is also noteworthy,
as it was a close competitor with the INTEL P4 -E 530 chipset.
<br/>
The 2800+ was faster than the Intel P4 chips in the arithmetic benchmark, also besting
those chips the FPU category. While the 2800+ did not report iSSE2 support, even the avid
workstation user shouldn't notice any performance losses working with desktop applications.
<br/>
As expected, the 3dMark score shows the 2800+ is not designed or suitable for the hardcore
gamer looking for outstanding performance in that field. The light gamer could still pick
up this system for a good price and invest the saved money into a higher-end video card,
and disable the onboard video. Utilizing the onboard 8x AGP slot for an aftermarket 3D
video card would easily turn this budget system into a suitable gaming machine.
<br/>
The Sempron 2800+ is not breaking any speed records in PCMark, but it also returns average
to good results for a budget-based system.
<br/>
The Celeron Based System returned the following Results:
<br/>
<b>Application Performance</b>
<br/>
It is worthy to note that not all number-based benchmarks represent real world
performance. The Sempron displayed some remarkable times and snappy response within
Windows XP that the Celeron system could not compete with. TWL used startup and
application open times to represent real world performance of a desktop workstation.
<br/>
<b>Windows XP SP1 Startup Time:</b>
Time was based on time to reach a fully loaded desktop from complete shutdown.
<br/>
ProcessorApplication timesAMD Sempron 2800+ (2000mhz)18 secondsIntel Celeron "D" 2800mhz25
seconds
<b>Microsoft Office Access- Opening a 100MB Database</b>
<br/>
ProcessorApplication timesAMD Sempron 2800+ (2000mhz)10.2 secondsIntel Celeron "D"
2800mhz11.1 seconds
<b>Microsoft Office Power Point- Opening a 10 MB PowerPoint Presentation</b>
<br/>
ProcessorApplication timesAMD Sempron 2800+ (2000mhz)7.3 secondsIntel Celeron "D"
2800mhz7.0 seconds
<b>Windows XP SP1- Copying a 100MB file to another directory on the same drive</b>
<br/>
ProcessorApplication timesAMD Sempron 2800+ (2000mhz)5.2 secondsIntel Celeron "D"
2800mhz6.8 secondsIn three out of four tests, the Sempron 2800+ system comes out clearly
ahead of the Celeron system. Aside from the numbers, however, the machine simply felt more
responsive. Menus and programs started faster, and there was little lag between folders
and moving objects within directories. Workstation and business users will likely perform
countless copy and paste operations of files and directories, which the Sempron handles
easily, with performance that could be felt and seen.
</p><p>
</p><p>
</p>