# AMD Preps First AM3-based Sempron Processors



## btarunr (Jul 20, 2009)

AMD is preparing its first set of Sempron processors based on the DDR3 supportive AM3 package. The first one, codenamed "Sargas" is a single-core chip that comes across as a single-core variant of the Athlon II X2 "Regor". It features a broad 3.6 GT/s HyperTransport 3.0 system interface, 128 KB of L1 and 1 MB of L2 cache, a dual-channel DDR2/DDR3 memory interface, an up-to-date AMD feature and instruction-set including AMD64, SSE4A, and AMD-V. 

Sargas is built on Global Foundries' 45 nm SOI process, and has an operating voltage range of 0.85 ~ 1.35 V. The first SKU based on this core is the Sempron X1 140 (model: SDX140HBGQBOX). It has a clock speed of 2.70 GHz, and a bus multiplier of 13.5x. At that speed, its TDP is rated at 45W. It will be available towards the end of this week, priced around 35 Euro.





*View at TechPowerUp Main Site*


----------



## ShadowFold (Jul 20, 2009)

Hmm about 50$.. Well, I guess once all the AM2/+ stuff phases out, this will be a decent deal.


----------



## Mussels (Jul 20, 2009)

wow, this is the first time i've seen sempron, and misread it as "some-pron"


Not a bad little chip, office machines and even media PC's should run fine on a 2.7Ghz single core.


----------



## DreamSeller (Jul 20, 2009)

Mussels said:


> wow, this is the first time i've seen sempron, and misread it as "some-pron"



 


hope they make dual cores with 45w tdp


----------



## Mussels (Jul 20, 2009)

DreamSeller said:


> hope they make dual cores with 45w tdp



they used to. they just werent semprons, i owned a few in my AMD days.


----------



## e6600 (Jul 20, 2009)

woo another failed x4
no matter, still has more than enough for regular computing


----------



## ShadowFold (Jul 20, 2009)

e6600 said:


> woo another failed x4
> no matter, still has more than enough for regular computing



It's actually a cut down version of the Regor core, which is an actual dual core.


----------



## HalfAHertz (Jul 20, 2009)

e6600 said:


> woo another failed x4
> no matter, still has more than enough for regular computing



It's actually a failed x2  (regor a.k.a. athlon II 250)

Edit: Damn Shadow, fly like a butterfly, sting like a bee much?  Beat me to it


----------



## DreamSeller (Jul 20, 2009)

Mussels said:


> *they used to*. they just werent semprons, i owned a few in my AMD days.



socket am3 ?


----------



## Mussels (Jul 20, 2009)

DreamSeller said:


> socket am3 ?



no, not AM3.

They had them in AM2, so they wont be far off launching them in AM3.


You could always get one and undervolt it yourself.


----------



## filip007 (Jul 20, 2009)

Junk CPU no thanks...

You can use it with DDR3 for more speed


----------



## btarunr (Jul 20, 2009)

e6600 said:


> woo another failed x4
> no matter, still has more than enough for regular computing



No, it's not carved out of disabling cores in a quad-core chip. At this time I can't say for sure if this isn't carved out of disabling a core from Regor (a 45nm "true" dual-core die).


----------



## DreamSeller (Jul 20, 2009)

Mussels said:


> no, not AM3.
> 
> They had them in AM2, so they wont be far off launching them in AM3.
> 
> ...



i dont want to keep it at stock i want to clock it so it eats like my stock 4400+ 65w or something  if you understood me


----------



## HalfAHertz (Jul 20, 2009)

I'm fairly certain that having one core disabled, will allow it to easily hit ~4Gh, considering that the average 250 usually does ~3,7-3,9. Don'k now if it will be any good with games with just 1 core tho...


----------



## a_ump (Jul 20, 2009)

if it is released at $50, i wonder if it'd be faster than a dual core 7750 kuma? i gotta say i dout it. Most kuma's seem to make it to 2.8-3ghz. So 3ghz dual core? or a guess at maybe 3.9ghz with the single sempron x1? i'd lean towards the dual. should be interesting to see benchies.

EDIT: actually the 7850 kuma is only $60bucks free shipping. most of the reviews seem to manage 3.1-3.4ghz oc on this. i think the 3.1ghz dual would win over a 3.9ghz single.


----------



## HalfAHertz (Jul 20, 2009)

It should, but then again this one is much more efficient, the kuma was rated at 95W if I'm not mistaking? At 45W it looks like the perfect e-machine, you could probably cool it passively with a bigger case


----------



## Easo (Jul 20, 2009)

filip007 said:


> Junk CPU no thanks...
> 
> You can use it with DDR3 for more speed



Its meant for office... :/ What did you expect?


----------



## filip007 (Jul 20, 2009)

Celeron E1400 is better...its Dual Core and cheap too sorry AMD, i have a linux system in plan...you don't need beefy hard. for X.


----------



## HalfAHertz (Jul 20, 2009)

filip007 said:


> Celeron E1400 is better...its Dual Core and cheap too sorry AMD, i have a linux system in plan...you don't need beefy hard. for X.



It's an ok cpu, but it really just shows how crippled C2D is without sufficient cache. It's ok for office and internet i guess but FSB+very little L2 cache is a painfull combination in my experience for anything else


----------



## Kitkat (Jul 20, 2009)

btarunr said:


> No, it's not carved out of disabling cores in a quad-core chip. At this time I can't say for sure if this isn't carved out of disabling a core from Regor (a 45nm "true" dual-core die).



yeahhhhhhh having to even respond to them is geting a little old, just makes them look stupid cause they dont read. noobnation.


----------



## BUCK NASTY (Jul 20, 2009)

Nice to see the Sempron grow up and finally get some decent L2.


----------



## DreamSeller (Jul 20, 2009)

filip007 said:


> Celeron E1400 is better...its Dual Core and cheap too sorry AMD, i have a linux system in plan...you don't need beefy hard. for X.



e1400 does not support ddr3 and comes at 2ghz sempron comes at 2.7 stock + as many said you may clock it till 3.9 or something so they must be the same 


is this the regor with a disabled core ?


----------



## Kitkat (Jul 20, 2009)

HalfAHertz said:


> It's an ok cpu, but it really just shows how crippled C2D is without sufficient cache. It's ok for office and internet i guess but FSB+very little L2 cache is a painfull combination in my experience for anything else



its a ddr3 chip even with a cheep kit itll be speedy and its 2.7 AM3, what experince do you have in an office with any of the above?? Might not run crysis on high but thats not what its for.


----------



## inferKNOX (Jul 20, 2009)

Wait, am I missing something here? I thought the new budget CPUs, ie Sempron equivalents, were going to be named Athlon II?


----------



## filip007 (Jul 20, 2009)

DDR 3 have higher latency and it will not run any better with only 200MHz BUS.


----------



## HalfAHertz (Jul 20, 2009)

Kitkat said:


> its a ddr3 chip even with a cheep kit itll be speedy and its 2.7 AM3, what experince do you have in an office with any of the above?? Might not run crysis on high but thats not what its for.



I'm talking about the celeron e1400  It uses the Frontside Bus instead of an integrated IMC which means that it will have a much greater latency when fetching data from the main memory. That woudn't be a problem if the FSB ran at a high frequency or if you had alot of L2 cache. Unfortunately you only get 256k per core, meaning that it gets full rather quickly and you have to resort to memory swapping.



filip007 said:


> DDR 3 have higher latency and it will not run any better with only 200MHz BUS.



It's not a 200Mhz Bus. That's just the base frequentcy. Multyply that by the HT multi of 10 and you get 2000Mz (3,6GT/s) and then I think it's doubled again because of dual channel memory, for an end result of 4000 Mhz. (someone please correct me if I'm wrong)


----------



## Zubasa (Jul 20, 2009)

HalfAHertz said:


> filip007 said:
> 
> 
> > DDR 3 have higher latency and it will not run any better with only 200MHz BUS.
> ...


Well not exactly this either.
AMD have their Memory Controller / Northbridge built into the cpu since K8 so the "FSB" have nothing to do with memory bandwidth.
DDR3 have higher timmings but that does not directly transfer to greater latencies, since the higher clock rate do allow more operations.
So unless you have some cheap DDR3 1066, DDR3 is not slower. It all depends on which DDR3 modules you are comparing to.

HyperTransport on the other hand, handles all the other communications for the CPU.


----------



## btarunr (Jul 20, 2009)

HalfAHertz said:


> It's not a 200Mhz Bus. That's just the base frequentcy. Multyply that by the HT multi of 10 and you get 2000Mz (3,6GT/s) and then I think it's doubled again because of dual channel memory, for an end result of 4000 Mhz. (someone please correct me if I'm wrong)



Host frequency = 200 MHz. 200 x 13.5 = 2700 MHz (CPU clock speed). 200 x 9.0x (NB multiplier) = 1800 MHz (NB speed). HyperTransport effective speed = 1800 MHz x 2 = 3600 MHz (3.6 GT/s).

Now by playing with the host frequency, you end up playing with a lot of other speeds.


----------



## toyo (Jul 20, 2009)

can this be possible? AMD-V? And so many of C2D do not have virtualization... man o'  man this is shitty stuff Intel... get virtualization on all products able to support it (like PIV+ or so), not based on market niche...


----------



## filip007 (Jul 20, 2009)

AMD x2 3800+ EE Brisbane with Geforce 7 board
or
Intel E1400 with G31 board

Both cost the same...what is better for linux?

I don't want any driver problems with AMD...hell no!


----------



## xaira (Jul 20, 2009)

yeh they did say this would have virtualisation


----------



## HalfAHertz (Jul 20, 2009)

toyo said:


> can this be possible? AMD-V? And so many of C2D do not have virtualization... man o'  man this is shitty stuff Intel... get virtualization on all products able to support it (like PIV+ or so), not based on market niche...



I dunno why people are so uptight about that. What exactly are you going to virtualize on such a low-end hardware? Why and how is this going to be beneficial. And do you expect any usefull levels of perfotmance from a 40-50$ component? Virtualization is usefull for cloud computing and enterprices. 

For the life of me I just can't think of any scenario where you would need ADVANCED virtualization technology with such a low end hardware. Maybe just emulate an older os for backwards compatibility...

You can still use VMware even without AMD-V or intel VT, you won't have direct access to the advanced functions and it's going to have more overhead and perform sower but you still get the basics you would need for a compatibility perspective.


----------



## DreamSeller (Jul 20, 2009)

filip007 said:


> AMD x2 3800+ EE Brisbane with Geforce 7 board
> or
> Intel E1400 with G31 board
> 
> ...


so you think you will have driver problems with amd and with intel no ?


----------



## filip007 (Jul 20, 2009)

Ubuntu have problems on AMD740 boards.

I don't like Athlon X2 the old models are not that good and new are just junky Phenoms with big power eat up.


----------



## mtosev (Jul 20, 2009)

single core should die already. buy a single core now and in 1 years it wont be enought for some tasks.


----------



## HalfAHertz (Jul 20, 2009)

mtosev said:


> single core should die already. buy a single core now and in 1 years it wont be enought for some tasks.



That's a very bold statement...


----------



## jamesrt2004 (Jul 20, 2009)

I see ACC will come to play, these are regor, with a core missing, so you may be able to ACC it back to a dual


----------



## Mussels (Jul 20, 2009)

jamesrt2004 said:


> I see ACC will come to play, these are regor, with a core missing, so you may be able to ACC it back to a dual



good point.


----------



## da bahstid (Jul 20, 2009)

*Not intended to be a benchmark monster*

This is the kind of chip you'd like to use in a low-power netbook, internet computer, music server...something on that level.  For that application, a hefty-cache 45nm single-core...I'd probably even go and underclock/undervolt it.  This would be great for that sort of thing.


----------



## MilkyWay (Jul 20, 2009)

you dont need a dual core to do basic tasks like office work, internet or that. basic machines right?

also for media you can let the graphics card do all the decoding


----------



## newtekie1 (Jul 20, 2009)

Seriously, with the E1400 going for $49, I'm not interested in this chip one bit.  Single core processor need to die.  They are only good for office use anymore, and the E1400 does those tasks with ease, and is better at other tasks, so why even consider the X1 140?

I wouldn't even hesitate to use an overclocked E1400 for gaming, it actually does quite well once you get it past 3.0GHz, but even at 4.0GHz I wouldn't want to use a single core for gaming...


----------



## btarunr (Jul 20, 2009)

HalfAHertz said:


> I dunno why people are so uptight about that. What exactly are you going to virtualize on such a low-end hardware? Why and how is this going to be beneficial. And do you expect any usefull levels of perfotmance from a 40-50$ component? Virtualization is usefull for cloud computing and enterprises.



You'll not be able to use Windows 7's "XP mode" feature, which requires AMD-V or Intel VT. And yes, that feature does seem to have many takers.


----------



## newtekie1 (Jul 20, 2009)

btarunr said:


> You'll not be able to use Windows 7's "XP mode" feature, which requires AMD-V or Intel VT. And yes, that feature does seem to have many takers.



Most of the computers that come with this processor will likely come with Win7 Home Premium, which won't have XP mode anyway...

The people that are going to shell out the change for Business or Ultimate Edition, probably aren't going to be looking to run it on the lowest end hardware available.

Though I do wish Intel would enable Virtualization on it's lower end processors, currently the cheapest processor you can get from Intel that supports it is the E6300.  Though I don't think Intel expected Microsoft to release XP Mode and require Virtualization.  Which is why the E6300, which is one of the latest processors to be released, supports it while the E7200-E7500 doesn't(the new E7600 does though).


----------



## Meecrob (Jul 20, 2009)

filip007 said:


> Ubuntu have problems on AMD740 boards.
> 
> I don't like Athlon X2 the old models are not that good and new are just junky Phenoms with big power eat up.



first anybody who takes noobiebuntu as a good example/distro of linux should shoot themselves, I have used vector linux,desktop bsd, nexenta and wolvix on 740 chipset based boards and guess what, no more problems then i ran across with any of the many intel based linux installs i have done.

as to the "junky phenoms" comment, these are phenom2 based chips not phenom 1 based.


----------



## Mussels (Jul 20, 2009)

its true and at the same time its not, newtekie.

The people most interested in using XP's virtualisation inst your mum 'n dad situation - its enthusiasts or tech support at small businesses who are going to be running this. In that situation, it wouldnt be surprising to find high end CPU's, low end CPU's overclocked, or 50 machines running celerons.

While i agree its not as bad as it sounds, many chips DO support it - it WILL cause problems for budget intel users, thats guaranteed. AFter 7 is out I expect no less than one thread a month about it here on TPU, even after we put up a damned sticky.


----------



## Meecrob (Jul 20, 2009)

newtekie1 said:


> Most of the computers that come with this processor will likely come with Win7 Home Premium, which won't have XP mode anyway...
> 
> The people that are going to shell out the change for Business or Ultimate Edition, probably aren't going to be looking to run it on the lowest end hardware available.



you are quite WRONG on this account, alot of large companies buy whatever is cheapist that can do what they want, One company around here recently bought a bunch of atom based mini desktops, singel core models, they wanted them for the reception staff and people who just use office and such, alot of companies do that kinda thing, its suprising how many infact, school districts do that as well, if dell/gateway/exct offers systems with these in them at a low price, alot of companies will buy them for systems that really dont need alot of power.

Hell I went in to our local DSHS office a few weeks back with a friend and found out they now have dual monitor dell thin client systems, pentium-d based, they are around 1 year old now from what the lady said, they have dual screens because they where cheaper then buying one large screen for each system, Im quite sure the p-d was chosen because thats what dell was trying to dump on govt agencys and gave them a killer price on them, they do the job, they arent fast, but really, they dont need to be they are office machiens.

and if you think this is bad, I know of a company in oregon thats slowly replacing their older desktop systems with eeepc's *shudders*


----------



## Meecrob (Jul 20, 2009)

Mussels said:


> its true and at the same time its not, newtekie.
> 
> The people most interested in using XP's virtualisation inst your mum 'n dad situation - its enthusiasts or tech support at small businesses who are going to be running this. In that situation, it wouldnt be surprising to find high end CPU's, low end CPU's overclocked, or 50 machines running celerons.
> 
> While i agree its not as bad as it sounds, many chips DO support it - it WILL cause problems for budget intel users, thats guaranteed. AFter 7 is out I expect no less than one thread a month about it here on TPU, even after we put up a damned sticky.



true dat, but also alot of companies will be interested(large ones) that have 2k and xp(from what i read, they will also allow 2k mode not just xp mode) because alot of companies run OLD ASS apps that they dont want to pay to update, apps the REQUIRE a specific windows version and/or a specific IE version, by allowing it on low end hardware they effectively allow the company to cheap out and get their employees a setup that can let them run those old apps on a modern os.

and you WILL see people posting questions/complaints because they where to stupid/lazy to make sure the hardware they bought will do what they want before they bought it......(damn stupid noobs!!!)


----------



## Mussels (Jul 20, 2009)

i love windows 2K  its my backup OS. 64MB of ram, and it works fine. If you found a way to have sex with 2K and got it pregnant, it would still be lighter than XP.

All i can see, is either businesses using thin clients continuing to use XP, small businesses upgrading their CPUs (probably to AMD), and home users ranting on TPU trying to blame everyone but themselves.

Since its been announced in advance that it requires hardware support, i'm sure any businesses with long term plans will upgrade in advance - its not like they'll leap on 7 the moment it comes out. They'll do it around SP1/SP2, and after they convince the boss some new PC's are neccesary.


----------



## Meecrob (Jul 20, 2009)

QTF about 2k, and the fact is, as long as you got a clue what your doing, it can game as well or better then xp, and it dosnt hate dual core cpu's, it hates HT tho, those virtual(fake)cores throw it for a loop, it thinks they are real and tries to use them as such :S

I can see some companies jumping on win7, not most but some, mainly due to the fact that alot of them are going to be upgrading 2k boxes so they can support stuff like office 2k7 that wont run on anything older then xp(at least not without haxing the installer)


----------



## filip007 (Jul 20, 2009)

Meecrob
AMD x2 7750 is not Phenom II based and it eat power like Phenom X4 core...OK

Some said that on forum last time...what is true than ???


----------



## newtekie1 (Jul 20, 2009)

Mussels said:


> its true and at the same time its not, newtekie.
> 
> The people most interested in using XP's virtualisation inst your mum 'n dad situation - its enthusiasts or tech support at small businesses who are going to be running this. In that situation, it wouldnt be surprising to find high end CPU's, low end CPU's overclocked, or 50 machines running celerons.
> 
> While i agree its not as bad as it sounds, many chips DO support it - it WILL cause problems for budget intel users, thats guaranteed. AFter 7 is out I expect no less than one thread a month about it here on TPU, even after we put up a damned sticky.



That is true, but I find it hard to believe that people that are willing to shell out the extra cash for Win7 Business or Ultimate are going to be running it on extreme low end hardware like this.

I agree, it will be a problem when it comes to some of the people running on E5000 and E7000 processor, as those are rather mid-range.  Though I think Intel has realized their mistake in disabling Virtualization with those processors, which is why the latest E7600 and E6300 both have it enabled again.

XP Mode is only being implemented in the higher end versions of Win7, because those versions tend to be run on higher end hardware.  I know this isn't always the case, as there are always a small few that don't fall into the trend.



Meecrob said:


> you are quite WRONG on this account, alot of large companies buy whatever is cheapist that can do what they want, One company around here recently bought a bunch of atom based mini desktops, singel core models, they wanted them for the reception staff and people who just use office and such, alot of companies do that kinda thing, its suprising how many infact, school districts do that as well, if dell/gateway/exct offers systems with these in them at a low price, alot of companies will buy them for systems that really dont need alot of power.
> 
> Hell I went in to our local DSHS office a few weeks back with a friend and found out they now have dual monitor dell thin client systems, pentium-d based, they are around 1 year old now from what the lady said, they have dual screens because they where cheaper then buying one large screen for each system, Im quite sure the p-d was chosen because thats what dell was trying to dump on govt agencys and gave them a killer price on them, they do the job, they arent fast, but really, they dont need to be they are office machiens.
> 
> and if you think this is bad, I know of a company in oregon thats slowly replacing their older desktop systems with eeepc's *shudders*



I never said companies don't use weak hardware, so I'm certainly not wrong, I completely understand that there are plenty of business that use lackluster hardware like this Sempron.

However, my point was that the companies running cheaper hardware, are cheap in the software side also.  Most of them will probably either stick with XP to avoid the costs of upgrading to Win7, or if they do upgrade, will likely do so to a lower version that doesn't even have XP Mode.  And if they are upgrading with the expectation of using XP Mode, they would be stupid to not make sure their cheap hardware supports it first.

How many of these same companies that buy the cheapest machines possible are also going to say "it doesn't need anything more than Win7 Basic, they are office machines"?


----------



## Mussels (Jul 20, 2009)

newtekie1 said:


> That is true, but I find it hard to believe that people that are willing to shell out the extra cash for Win7 Business or Ultimate are going to be running it on extreme low end hardware like this.


I find it even harder to beleive, that a business is going to throw another $100 per machine to get this feature, when they could just stick with what they have and XP.
(and i mean $100 on top of whatever their budget new 7 systems would have cost)



newtekie1 said:


> XP Mode is only being implemented in the higher end versions of Win7, because those versions tend to be run on higher end hardware.  I know this isn't always the case, as there are always a small few that don't fall into the trend.



Businesses always use cheap hardware. always. have a look around, high end in an office means a pentium D.




newtekie1 said:


> I never said companies don't use weak hardware, so I'm certainly not wrong, I completely understand that there are plenty of business that use lackluster hardware like this Sempron.


nothing to argue here... moving along 



newtekie1 said:


> However, my point was that the companies running cheaper hardware, are cheap in the software side also.  Most of them will probably either stick with XP to avoid the costs of upgrading to Win7, or if they do upgrade, will likely do so to a lower version that doesn't even have XP Mode.  And if they are upgrading with the expectation of using XP Mode, they would be stupid to not make sure their cheap hardware supports it first.


hmmm... i made that point too. soon we shall align, and form a solar eclipse.



newtekie1 said:


> How many of these same companies that buy the cheapest machines possible are also going to say "it doesn't need anything more than Win7 Basic, they are office machines"?


I think we stopped disagreeing. The companies are either going to buy the cheapest ones with hardware and software not capable of virtualisation, or just stick with the XP machines they have.


----------



## Disparia (Jul 20, 2009)

^ Don't group all businesses together - I'm the admin of one of them 

For non-IT, we're looking at upgrading our users with Phenom X3/3GB boxes and for IT, some i7 action!!

Though I admit there are some P4D boxes around here currently.


----------



## Mussels (Jul 20, 2009)

Jizzler said:


> ^ Don't group all businesses together - I'm the admin of one of them
> 
> For non-IT, we're looking at upgrading our users with Phenom X3/3GB boxes and for IT, some i7 action!!
> 
> Though I admit there are some P4D boxes around here currently.



even your business, with i7 machines still has P4's hanging around - thats my point. Nothing gets updated unless its needed. To run windows 7 with virtual XP, they need updated hardware... why, when the old hardware can run XP fine?

Then again, one i7 system could probably run ALL those P4's in virtual systems and remote desktop over thinware clients, and still have more overall power


----------



## filip007 (Jul 20, 2009)

Enebody use this AMD-V last time it bloked both my system when i try to use it with Virtual PC so is not that good...

and only AMD makes 45W DTP CPUs but with this score is not any beetter than Intel with 65W

http://www.legitreviews.com/article/850/14/


----------



## newtekie1 (Jul 20, 2009)

Mussels said:


> I find it even harder to beleive, that a business is going to throw another $100 per machine to get this feature, when they could just stick with what they have and XP.
> (and i mean $100 on top of whatever their budget new 7 systems would have cost)
> 
> 
> ...



I think for the most part we are on the same page.  Businesses are more than likely going to stick with what they have, hardware and software wise or upgrade to new hardware with Win7 included.  In the case of an upgrade, if they buy a computer with one of the versions of Win7 that can actually run XP Mode, it will likely have hardware that can do it also, and it won't be this Sempron.


----------



## Mussels (Jul 20, 2009)

^ agreed.

(Hooray )


----------



## Disparia (Jul 20, 2009)

Mussels said:


> even your business, with i7 machines still has P4's hanging around - thats my point. Nothing gets updated unless its needed. To run windows 7 with virtual XP, they need updated hardware... why, when the old hardware can run XP fine?
> 
> Then again, one i7 system could probably run ALL those P4's in virtual systems and remote desktop over thinware clients, and still have more overall power



Meant to say that every station will be replaced with an X3/i7 system shortly, but yes, I see yer point. I also don't get why others would upgrade just to use XP in a VM. We're going pure Windows 7.

Perhaps too many of them bought into Software Assurance.


----------



## Mussels (Jul 20, 2009)

Jizzler said:


> Perhaps too many of them bought into Software Assurance.



too many of them hired some kid fresh out of uni/college to code them a program on the cheap, and forgot to plan ahead when asking him what to code.


----------



## Valdez (Jul 20, 2009)

Mussels said:


> i love windows 2K  its my backup OS. 64MB of ram, and it works fine. If you found a way to have sex with 2K and got it pregnant, it would still be lighter than XP.



rofl


----------



## extrasalty (Jul 20, 2009)

I think everyone forgets 1 Euro doesn't equal 1.5 USD- therefore assuming it will cost $50 is wrong. Currently LE-1640 and LE-1660 are between 30-35 Euro and around $40.
Secondly, I'm tired of people stating single core is dead. It's not. It won't be. People believe marketing too much. 
Those processors have purpose- just like the Atom. People forget that the Atom is crippled by Intel, so it doesn't cannibalize their mainstream. Atoms are not for crunching or virtualization.
Quick check on newegg- Intel doesn't have anything cheaper than $40(Celeron 430) and nothing except the above Celeron(at least on paper) below 45W. So in a way this new Sempron is competing with Atoms. When you add the price of the motherboard, it will wind up around $80-85- much like the Atom. With the difference of real PCIe x16 and DD3. Now which one has more value?
So in the end this is a niche product- it won't be too popular, but it's part of AMD strategy to improve their yields.


----------



## filip007 (Jul 20, 2009)

So much about AMD power efficiency !!!


----------



## newtekie1 (Jul 20, 2009)

extrasalty said:


> I think everyone forgets 1 Euro doesn't equal 1.5 USD- therefore assuming it will cost $50 is wrong. Currently LE-1640 and LE-1660 are between 30-35 Euro and around $40.
> Secondly, I'm tired of people stating single core is dead. It's not. It won't be. People believe marketing too much.
> Those processors have purpose- just like the Atom. People forget that the Atom is crippled by Intel, so it doesn't cannibalize their mainstream. Atoms are not for crunching or virtualization.
> Quick check on newegg- Intel doesn't have anything cheaper than $40(Celeron 430) and nothing except the above Celeron(at least on paper) below 45W. So in a way this new Sempron is competing with Atoms. When you add the price of the motherboard, it will wind up around $80-85- much like the Atom. With the difference of real PCIe x16 and DD3. Now which one has more value?
> So in the end this is a niche product- it won't be too popular, but it's part of AMD strategy to improve their yields.



Desktop processors like this certainly don't compete with Atom.  Atom is meant to be small, and put out as little heat/use a little power as possible.  An entire Atom system, with the shitty 945 chipset, still only consumes 20w.  This Sempron consumes more than the entire system...

This processor is mean specifically to compete with Intel's Celerons.  You also have to realize that the current Celerons are still 65nm, the 45nm Celerons should be hitting the market soon, with better thermal characteristics.

And the fact remains, if I had my choice between The X1 140 and the E1400, I would take the E1400, and both should be prices pretty similarly.

And the single core market is pretty much dead, with the exception of the netbook and nettop markets, for wich this processor really isn't suited for.


----------



## t77snapshot (Jul 20, 2009)

I'm still running an old Sempron 3200+ 1.8GHz in one of my other rigs. It's nice to see the Sempron back in action


----------



## Meecrob (Jul 20, 2009)

newtekie1 said:


> That is true, but I find it hard to believe that people that are willing to shell out the extra cash for Win7 Business or Ultimate are going to be running it on extreme low end hardware like this.
> 
> I agree, it will be a problem when it comes to some of the people running on E5000 and E7000 processor, as those are rather mid-range.  Though I think Intel has realized their mistake in disabling Virtualization with those processors, which is why the latest E7600 and E6300 both have it enabled again.
> 
> ...



Software Assurance clients will look at this(alot of large companies got involved in this and maps) 

Now logically WE wouldn't be all excited about XP mode because WE know its no big deal, but look at how many large companies endup with crapware because some manager read something about this wonderful crapware and told the IT dept to rush out and buy it. 

In this case, it makes sense at least in the way of new systems that are ordered pre-setup with windows, large companies I have worked for many times have dell pre-install the OS and base apps for them now days rather then have their own IT guys do it, OR they have hdd replicators and just setup one of the new systems and clone the drive to all the others, and Im not saying its smart to use lowend hardware for visualization but who ever knew a noob to be smart?  and most people out there are really noobs where tech is concerned, they buy into the hype and marketing, one of the best was watching a large realestate firm around here buy into this "marketing program" that was nothing more then a canned website with a cms backend that let them post new listings easily, they spent tends of thousands on it, when it was ALL FREE SOFTWARE, some company just set it up for them and sent them a how to guide on how to use it....god that was sad, their website and listings looked so cheezy(what you would expect from canned websites) 

its like all the companies that use FOSS (free open source software) as the core of retail apps, making bank from very little work, many times they just build a frontend using .net then sell the app like they built the whole thing :/

if you want a good example check out ffmpeg's hall of sham http://ffmpeg.org/shame.html

alot of those apps use ffmpeg and other FOSS software's as the core or bulk of their app, just slapping a nice gui on it and charging money for it........

blah, i agree with what your saying for the most part, but logic dosnt mean dick in the real business world, Till you have delt with this kinda person/entity yourself you have no idea how illogical they really can be.........

watch these 3 videos the bottem 2 are pretty relevant they are all funny as hell 
http://www.thewebsiteisdown.com/
then you will have a SMALL clue how bad it really is when you work for/with the kind of morons that run the business world these days :S


----------



## tastegw (Jul 20, 2009)

filip007 said:


> So much about AMD power efficiency !!!
> 
> http://media.bestofmicro.com/S/9/151353/original/17.png



pull one up for idle comsumption.

alot of office pc's never reach anything over 25%% useage,  im on my work office pc with a few beefy programs open and im running under 10%


----------



## hat (Jul 20, 2009)

... is it unlockable to dual core?



filip007 said:


> So much about AMD power efficiency !!!
> 
> http://media.bestofmicro.com/S/9/151353/original/17.png



yeah, I believe that.


----------



## newtekie1 (Jul 20, 2009)

Meecrob said:


> blah, i agree with what your saying for the most part, but logic dosnt mean dick in the real business world, Till you have delt with this kinda person/entity yourself you have no idea how illogical they really can be.........
> 
> watch these 3 videos the bottem 2 are pretty relevant they are all funny as hell
> http://www.thewebsiteisdown.com/
> then you will have a SMALL clue how bad it really is when you work for/with the kind of morons that run the business world these days :S



Oh I completely agree, my company provides support for a lot of companies, most of whom are filled with complete idiots when it comes to computers and technologies.

However, like I've already said, these companies are not going to go through entire company wide upgrades to Win7 if they have low end equipment.  These are the idiots that think nothing past XP is good, remember.  And any new computers they get, that come with Win7, assuming they are looking to actually use XP Mode, will have hardware to back it up, and again it will not be this sempron.

This sempron will be put into complete trash throw away computers.  I don't doubt companies will buy them.  However, the computer will come with Win7 Basic, maybe Home Premium, not any version that will support XP Mode.  Because it doesn't make sense for a computer company to sell a low end computer with a higher end operating system.  The idea is to keep the machine as cheap as possible, and hence they will use the cheapest operating system they can.



hat said:


> ... is it unlockable to dual core?



I hope so, but something tells me AMD might have learned from that mistake and physically disable the core before shipping the processors.



t77snapshot said:


> I'm still running an old Sempron 3200+ 1.8GHz in one of my other rigs. It's nice to see the Sempron back in action



Still running a Sempron 2600+ here, AKA Athlon *XP* 2200+...


----------



## Meecrob (Jul 20, 2009)

oh, you see them say vista sucks, till one of the execs gets a laptop with vista and ends up loving it, then u see them all start wanting it *groans* this will become more common with 7 as its more noobish(macish).

and it doesn't matter what the system comes with for large companies, most of them will wipe it and install their own apps, this is for a few reasons, but mostly because even buisness class systems come with trialware like office trial and such, they tend to own office and the whole office uses a specific version, I haven't seen many businesses or schooles/govt agencies that dont wipe the system and do a clean install if they didnt get dell/gateway/exct to put EXACTLY what they wanted on the system to start, it makes sense if your doing alot of support to try and get all the systems as alike as possible, same drivers and patch levels, saves time trying to track down issues on a stack of systems all running diffrent windows versions/patch levels/drivers.

I can about guarantee that our local library system will end up with these or something similar(whatever dell or gateway offer) their head IT guy avoided intel the last 2 times they upgraded, from what I have been told he dosnt like Intel as a company, also hes had less issues with the AMD builds then the ones they replaced(all dell systems from when dell only offered intel) 

He wont want vitalization most likely BUT he will probably endup with 7 on them as I KNOW the library has a software assurance type deal with MS that lets them upgrade their software cheaply.

BUT i could be wrong about the XP mode thing at the library, they do have some older apps they STILL RUN on them as they try and get the totally web based system debugged, ones for searching certain types of articles over an OLD ASS network thats still in use across the nation if not world, it works, but its SLOW(i only have used it 2x, but alot of people I know used it to do work for college classes as its considered a use able source of information by most teachers.


----------



## LittleLizard (Jul 21, 2009)

me want to replace my dying p4


----------



## btarunr (Jul 21, 2009)

newtekie1 said:


> Most of the computers that come with this processor will likely come with Win7 Home Premium, which won't have XP mode anyway...



And that's besides the point. If you want to use it, you can use it. But with the $160 Core 2 Quad Q8200, if you want to use it, you can't.


----------



## joshiers8605 (Jul 21, 2009)

ha, i'm using a sempron 3000+ socket 754 as we speak since my mb went out for my dual core


----------



## Hayder_Master (Jul 21, 2009)

i see there is no sense to get AM3 mobo with DRR3 ram's and put Sempron cpu


----------



## newtekie1 (Jul 21, 2009)

btarunr said:


> And that's besides the point. If you want to use it, you can use it. But with the $160 Core 2 Quad Q8200, if you want to use it, you can't.



Yes, I understand that, and I've already mentioned at least once that I believe Intel has realized the mistake in disabling Virtualization on lower pricessors.  I believe this is evident by the fact that it is not disabled on newer processors being released, that are lower end.  Such as the E7600 and E6300, when previously the E7000 series and the Pentium Dual-Core series did not have Virtualization.

Though I think they were really thrown for a loop when Microsoft announced that XP Mode would require Virtualization technology.  Virtual PC has never required this before, and there is really no reason that it should require it, it should run fine without it, granted it will have worse performance, but at least it will run.


----------



## LittleLizard (Jul 22, 2009)

hayder.master said:


> i see there is no sense to get AM3 mobo with DRR3 ram's and put Sempron cpu



ddr3 is getting cheaper and also is eco friendly so thats why they made it compatible with ddr3


----------



## newtekie1 (Jul 23, 2009)

LittleLizard said:


> ddr3 is getting cheaper and also is eco friendly so thats why they made it compatible with ddr3



It has DDR3 support because it is a regor core with a core disabled, the DDR3 controller was already there, no point in disabling it.


----------

