Originally posted by ZeroHour: yeah I know the hard drive is probably semi slow. I would have to look up online what the seek time is. I know its not horrible though. Plus there is ~400 dollars worth of software on it, if not more.
I'm still not sure how an AMD that is 1.8 or 2.0 ghz is faster then a 3.2ghz intel. The steps are shorter in the AMD, but I don't know how another 1.2ghz could not out do that.
There are three reasons. The first explains why the Celeron is not actually faster than the Sempron 64, despite the advertised clock speed.
1) AMD chips perform more operations per clock cycle than Intel chips. By this alone then, the "speed" of the Sempron 64 and the Celeron are comparable.
The next two reasons are why the Sempron 64 is actually better.
2) The Sempron 64 is (as you can tell by the name) 64-bit. This is a huge plus, even though on 32-bit machines you're not going to notice too much difference. 3) Superior architecture. No exceptions, the CPU architectures designed by AMD during this generation of processors blow the Intel chips out of the water. Not only are they faster, they're also less prone to overheating.
64-bit is a huge plus? can you tell me exactly why?
are you runnning a 64-bit OS? do you have device drivers that actually WORK on that OS? hmmm...
my comment to this thread... wait 3-4 months, save up some extra $$$$ during that time and buy an Intel Core Duo2 system (i.e. Conroe) - at least it won't be outdated in 12 months
