why bicker instead of research? who cares which CPU plurbs the X axis fastest with the same equipment--within .0006MHz per nansecond per a pretty graph? this sort of review is pratical, a bit biased by the writer and the components, and very effective. excluding neophytes, one can read the review and form an opinion and have a starting point to dig. at this stage can't we all go to our chosen sites and get thespecs, again excluding neophytic box builders, the writer can offer an educated and hopefully reliable opinion on the value vs. horsepower of the CPU because the CPUs have different targets, determining to the Nth degree which is faster kind of skirts the usefulness of the article, doesn't it?
Which is now how AMD has positioned Sempron so in the argument of which would you choose; Sempron or Celeron...which one would win and be the obvious choice?
sempron of course. I was saying that pitting a sempron against a p4 is a fair fight as a regular xp would have crushed a p4 and along that lines, the sempron would have crushed the celeron so bad all that would be left under the hsf would have been a small amount of silica dust.
Comments
This processor, and any arguments surrounding it, are long obsolete.
sempron of course. I was saying that pitting a sempron against a p4 is a fair fight as a regular xp would have crushed a p4 and along that lines, the sempron would have crushed the celeron so bad all that would be left under the hsf would have been a small amount of silica dust.
Im a tad back logged on my replies to threads...