Gaming Performance

The Semprons are much stronger gaming performers than the Celeron D, showing their might in newer games like Doom 3, but the gap closes as we move to older games like UT2004 and Wolfenstein: Enemy Territory. Regardless, the Sempron is still the better gaming CPU of the two. However, there's a huge performance gap between the Semprons and the low end Athlon 64s.

Doom 3

Doom 3

Unreal Tournament 2004

Unreal Tournament 2004

Wolfenstein: ET

Wolfenstein: Enemy Territory

Audio/Video Encoding 3D Rendering


View All Comments

  • snorre - Friday, June 24, 2005 - link

    It seems like AMD also has enabled 64-bit support in this CPU:

    Even better value then I guess.
  • snorre - Friday, June 24, 2005 - link

  • Tbuch - Sunday, June 5, 2005 - link

    In a time where the Processors are named with a lot of Letter addition Anandtech (and others) must be very caryfully to use these letters. You have been using a Intel 915P Motherboard which is a Socket 775 bord - therefor the Celeron processor you have tested must be a Celeron D 345J (with a"J" addition) and not "only" a 345. Am I right? Reply
  • johnsonx - Friday, April 22, 2005 - link

    Interesting... the board's BIOS claims Cool'n'quiet support, and I loaded the latest processor driver from AMD that claims Cool'n'Quiet support for Sempron (same one I use on my own A64 2800+), but I couldn't get the Cool'n'Quiet/PowerNow dashboard demo to run (claimed no supported processor), nor could I see any other sign that it was working, like a low processor speed report in System Properties.

    a mystery...

    (ok, so this is a bit off topic, but at least we are still talking about Semprons)
  • Rand - Friday, April 22, 2005 - link

    I built a system around a Sempron 2600+ (S754) a few weeks ago, Cool n' Quiet worked fine on the MSI K8T Neo-FSR.

    Stock VCore is 1.4V, it dropped to 1.0V and 1GHz at minimum.
  • johnsonx - Wednesday, April 20, 2005 - link

    #47 - you may or may not be right that only 1.6Ghz semprons don't have CnQ support, but it isn't because of an 8x multiplier limitation. My A64 2800+ drops to 989Mhz on CnQ (I'm guessing that's actually supposed to be 1.0Ghz, but my mainboard's clock is a touch low). That implies a 5x multiplier. Either way, it's clear a 1.8Ghz CPU can drop to 1.0Ghz, so why can't a 1.6Ghz one do it?

    It'd be nice if AMD would make this clear somewhere - if CnQ is a desireable feature, then why hide which CPU's have it and which don't?

    (actually disabling it on ANY cpu is stupid in the first place, but again, AMD doesn't check with me on what I think is stupid)

    Oh, BTW, to answer your other question, CnQ drops my A64 2800+ to 1.0v, and as far as I can recall the Sempron 2600+ runs at 1.4v. I'll look when I setup one of them later today (they're in boxes in the customer's office now).
  • Visual - Wednesday, April 20, 2005 - link

    in regards to CnQ on the semprons - it is available to all semprons except the 1.6GHz models, as they are already at 8x multi by default (and CnQ lowers the multi, but it cant get any lower than 8x)

    I wanna know if CnQ lowers the voltages and by how much.. and if the 1.6GHz semprons come at the lower voltages by default or they are at 1.4v too... but yeah, this is quite out of the topic here. sorry.
  • Andyvan - Tuesday, April 19, 2005 - link

    I'm curious about the tests in which the Sempron out-performed the Athlon 64 3200. Both were running at the same clock speed, and the Sempron has 1/4 the cache.

    Is this due to SSE3 support?

    -- Andyvan

  • Jep4444 - Tuesday, April 19, 2005 - link

    the XP 3200+ has been discontinued for quite some time but the A64 2800+ is still in production hence why its a better comparison Reply
  • Rav3n - Tuesday, April 19, 2005 - link

    I would like to have seen a comparison with the Athlon XP 3200+ as well... even though that is just adding yet an additional platform. Reply

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now