When AMD offered to send us their latest Sempron CPU for review, we honestly felt a little ashamed - we had almost entirely forgotten about the budget CPU that launched last June. Had we missed other Sempron reviews since its launch? Were we too tied up in the higher end desktop processors and the dual core migration to pay attention to AMD's brand new budget line? After a moment's panic, we calmed ourselves and realized something that had surprised us a bit - AMD hadn't released a faster Socket-754 Sempron since its launch in June 2004. Not a single new CPU in ten and a half months. We stopped feeling so bad.

Intel was slightly better, but not by much. After our original review of the 90nm Celeron D, Intel released one more CPU, the Celeron D 345, late last year, but it's been quiet since then. And we thought the mainstream CPU race had slowed down.

So, it was time for an updated comparison, but luckily, the field hadn't changed much - or had it? Remembering back to our original Sempron review, AMD initially introduced two Semprons: a Socket-A and an Socket-754 version. The Socket-A version has topped out at 3000+ (2.0GHz) and it doesn't look like there's any future beyond it for the aging platform. The Socket-754 platform has yet to out-live its welcome and thus, AMD's newest Sempron, the Sempron 3300+, is a Socket-754-only CPU. The Socket-754 Sempron is based on AMD's K8 architecture, but is a 32-bit only CPU (no x64 support here). As a Socket-754 CPU, the Sempron only features a single channel DDR400 memory controller.

Intel's Celeron D 345 was merely a clock bump to the Celeron D 335 that we reviewed last June, bringing Intel's fastest Celeron up to 3.06GHz while still remaining on the 533MHz FSB. AMD's Sempron 3300+ isn't as simple of a transition, however. The original Socket-754 Sempron was built on a 130nm process and featured a 256KB L2 cache, whereas the new Sempron 3300+ is built on AMD's 90nm process and features a 128KB L2 cache. The new Sempron also features all of the enhancements that made it into the 90nm Athlon 64 processors - mainly SSE3 support and some enhancements to the memory controller.

The higher rating is due to a higher clock speed; the Sempron 3300+ runs at 2.0GHz compared to the 3100+'s 1.8GHz clock. But with half of the L2 cache, the performance picture is bound to be much more interesting than just a regular clock bump.

With only a 128KB L2 cache, the Sempron 3300+ is definitely a step back in terms of the cache sizes that we expect to see on modern day microprocessors. At the same time, halving the cache while moving to a smaller process ensures that AMD can enjoy larger profit margins on these new Sempron CPUs. But AMD's profit margins aren't our concern here; what we care about is how the 3300+ performs and going one step further, a cool running 90nm chip with a very small 128KB L2 cache is quite attractive to the overclocker in us.

With an on-die memory controller, the Socket-754 Semprons can get away with having relatively small L2 caches, since their main memory access latencies are very low to begin with. But even if we estimate that the on-die memory controller of a Sempron reduces memory accesses to around ~120 cycles, an access from L2 cache is going to still take about 1/10th that. In the end, while AMD's K8 architecture is less dependent on large caches, it is still not impervious to the impact that a small one can have.

Priced at $127, the Sempron 3300+ is priced similarly to Intel's Celeron D 345 ($133) and the Athlon 64 3000+ ($140). That being said, let's see how it competes...

The Test

AMD Athlon 64 Configuration

Socket-939 Athlon 64 CPUs
2 x 512MB OCZ PC3200 EL Dual Channel DIMMs 2-2-2-10
MSI nForce4 SLI Motherboard
ATI Radeon X800 XT PCI Express

AMD Sempron Configuration

Socket-754 Sempron CPUs
2 x 512MB OCZ PC3200 EL Dual Channel DIMMs 2-2-2-10
ABIT NF8 nForce3 Motherboard
ATI Radeon X800 XT AGP

Intel Celeron D Configuration

LGA-775 Intel Celeron D 345 (3.06GHz)
2 x 512MB Crucial DDR-II 533 Dual Channel DIMMs 3-3-3-12
Intel 915P Motherboard
ATI Radeon X800 XT PCI Express

Business/General Use Performance
Comments Locked

53 Comments

View All Comments

  • AtaStrumf - Tuesday, April 19, 2005 - link

    #28 overclockingoodness

    My point exactly!!! Someone with an AXP and a 6600GT looks at those charts and thinks: "Holy crap, I really gotta get me a S939 Athlon 3200", when in reality that would be a waste of his money, becasue his GPU would be the bottleneck and a S939 chip would not be able to do $h!t for him. That's why I think, it is important to run CPU game tests with a comparible GPU, otherwise the picture is seriously distorted!

    The best thing to do, would be to run both sets of tests, because running just high end GPU tests is not telling the whole story. A VERY IMPORTANT PART is missing!

    Because of tests like this, I don't really know how much of a bottleneck my Athlon 3200+ S754 is or is not, when coupled with my 6600GT. Should I primarily invest in a new CPU or a new GPU? Only if I get a new high end GPU, can I actually use tests like this to tell me if I should also get a new CPU or is that just a waste of my money?

    GPU tests make this same mistake, by eliminating the CPU bottleneck, by using FX-55 and co. The problem is, that by doing so, they venture in unreal territory, with, for the most part, unrealistic CPU/GPU combos. Great for theory, not so great for practice!
  • nserra - Tuesday, April 19, 2005 - link

    I mean DUAL CORE READY.
  • nserra - Tuesday, April 19, 2005 - link

    I think this review lacks Athlon 64 with socket 754. Unless Athlon 64 with that socket is dead?
    Even so is not right comparing a socket 939 with a socket 754 CPU.

    AMD is doing great with this new CPUs, too bad they have a bad markting machine.

    Right now if INTEL WAS AMD we were already having a campain saying DUAL CORE COMPATIBLE on socket 939 boards. But no ....
  • alangeering - Tuesday, April 19, 2005 - link

    can any reviewer give a guide as to which tests included SSE3 optimisations?

    This was not stated in the review.

    Until the newer stepping of A64, many will not have SSE3, and so, in some media encoding tests you may have been able to show a difference between the A64 and the Semperon (in the semperon's favour).

    I'm running an A64 3000 on S939, with no SSE3 support.
  • KristopherKubicki - Tuesday, April 19, 2005 - link

    Tujan: The Lightscape benchmark comes as a portion of SPECviewperf 8.1. It is not a standalone application.

    Kristopher
  • karlreading - Tuesday, April 19, 2005 - link

    This reminds me a little of a few years back when a thunderbird cost barley more than a spitfire / morgan. made the duron have no market place. AMD should keep the sempron much more crippled than the a64, to give the sempron its market and protect high end a64 chips sales / status. either that or make the lower number a64's unavalible sooner, and replace them with sempys at higer numbers.
    karlos
  • DrMrLordX - Tuesday, April 19, 2005 - link

    Cool & Quiet only works for the Sempron 3000+ or higher. The socket 754 2600+ and 2800+ do not support it.
  • cryptonomicon - Monday, April 18, 2005 - link

    Man I wish there was an exciting TWIST In this article, oh well. Just looks like AMD looked to cut costs in the latest sempron and produce a more power/heat efficent processor, not much fancy :(
  • Avalon - Monday, April 18, 2005 - link

    Zebo, you know I work for stability :)
  • Tujan - Monday, April 18, 2005 - link

    Anybody Have a Link to the Program used here. To browse:

    """Lightscape Viewset (light-07)
    "The light-07 viewset was created from traces of the graphics workload generated by the Lightscape Visualization System from Discreet Logic. Lightscape combines proprietary radiosity algorithms with a physically based lighting interface.

    The most significant feature of Lightscape is its ability to simulate global illumination effects accurately by precalculating the diffuse energy distribution in an environment and storing the lighting distribution as part of the 3D model. """....

    I looked at AutoDesk but 'Lightscape,is no longer supported/obsolete. Cant be the same program. thanks.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now