AMD Sempron

[T2k]

WTH is this actually?

AMD Set To Deliver New Processor Family That Redefines Everyday Computing

—Delivery of AMD Sempron™ and Mobile AMD Sempron processors expected in second half 2004—

SUNNYVALE, CALIF. -- June 7, 2004 --AMD (NYSE: AMD) today announced that it will introduce a new brand of PC processors to be named AMD Sempron™. The AMD Sempron processor family is expected to redefine everyday computing for today’s value-conscious buyers of desktop and notebook PCs.

AMD Sempron processors are being developed to meet the evolving day-to-day needs of home and business PC users. Basic computing is no longer just about email, Web browsing or word processing. Today it’s also about downloading and playing music, or sending pictures to family and friends. This full-featured product line is designed to deliver best-in-class performance for the growing segment of PC users who want more from their PCs.

“AMD is changing the name of the game for everyday computing. We have responded to evolving customer needs with a compelling solution that delivers the performance needed for today’s applications,†said Marty Seyer, vice president and general manager, Microprocessor Business Unit, AMD. “The AMD Sempron brand is expected to carry on our tradition to always strive to provide our customers more value.â€

More details about AMD’s new mobile and desktop processors will be forthcoming in the second half of 2004. Shipments of the AMD Sempron and Mobile AMD Sempron processors are scheduled to begin during the second half of 2004.

AMD Athlon™ 64 processors will continue to be offered for outstanding 32-bit performance, capability for tomorrow’s 64-bit applications, and Enhanced Virus Protection in conjunction with the upcoming Windows® XP Service Pack 2. Likewise, AMD Athlon XP processors for desktop PCs and Mobile AMD Athlon XP-M processors will continue to be offered for those customers seeking advanced functionality and performance for mainstream home and office computing.

Source: http://www.amd.com/us-en/Corporate/VirtualPressRoom/0,,51_104_543~86164,00.html

 

[BRiT]

Perhaps a smaller L2-cache, 32bit-only, socket 754/739 processor derived from the AMD-64 cpus?

 

[Killer-Kris]

Perhaps a smaller L2-cache, 32bit-only, socket 754/739 processor derived from the AMD-64 cpus?

I really hope for AMD's sake that Sempron isn't actually a 32-bit only chip. They really need to ship as many 64-bit processors as possible. Doing anything less will only hurt their market/mind share.

 

[cristic]

My guess is that Sempron is sort of a Duron64... well, certainly hope so

 

[hoom]

There was a link posted not so long ago that suggested that AMD would do a 32bit version of Athlon64 (Isn't that just an AthlonXP?) for socket 759 or something like that.

 

[rainz]

It's an Athlon 64 with the 64 disabled .. for the entry lvl .. Kinda dumb. and with less everything .. a real duron a-like in fact.

RainZ

 

[Mendel]

Well if it has the integrated memory controller it can still play ball.

 

[jvd]

I remkember reading amd was going to out source its athlon xp fabing to another company . Perhaps thats what this is ?

a sub 100$ market still exists for athlon xps. IF they can keep them close to the the botom of the line p4s and athlon 64s they could make money

 

[Fox5]

I heard AMD will have 3 sempron lines..
One will just be athlon xp under a new name and continue socket A.
The next will be on socket 754, 256KB l2 cache, no 64 bit support.
And one will be on socket 939, and may or may not support dual channel.

 

[Martin Eddy]

AMD AUST. MARKETING MANAGER
Sempron is CHEAP

In reply to FOX: You're pretty close there.

 

[mat]

I really hope for AMD's sake that Sempron isn't actually a 32-bit only chip. They really need to ship as many 64-bit processors as possible. Doing anything less will only hurt their market/mind share.

I dont think so... before intel announced that they'll use AMD64, AMD needed to get as many AMD64s out to get Software Support, but since intel is adopting it to, they dont need to push it.
They just charge extra money for the 64 Bit Version (which is IMO a good decision for AMD)
i dont think that a low end part hurts them. anyone who wants Power gets the "real" CPU and everyone who doesnt care, gets the Value CPU (and doesnt Care about 64 Bit)

 

[Fox5]

I really hope for AMD's sake that Sempron isn't actually a 32-bit only chip. They really need to ship as many 64-bit processors as possible. Doing anything less will only hurt their market/mind share.

I dont think so... before intel announced that they'll use AMD64, AMD needed to get as many AMD64s out to get Software Support, but since intel is adopting it to, they dont need to push it.
They just charge extra money for the 64 Bit Version (which is IMO a good decision for AMD)
i dont think that a low end part hurts them. anyone who wants Power gets the "real" CPU and everyone who doesnt care, gets the Value CPU (and doesnt Care about 64 Bit)

Problem is if intel has a celeron 64. People will get it, just thinking of 64 bit the same way they think of mhz, as an indicator of power(plus there will eventually be 64 bit only software, future proofing eh?), even if the sempron greatly outperforms the fastest celeron 64 while the celeron is using 64 bit and costs 3x the price of the sempron, people will still go for the celeron 64.

 

[Moffell]

Problem is if intel has a celeron 64. People will get it, just thinking of 64 bit the same way they think of mhz, as an indicator of power(plus there will eventually be 64 bit only software, future proofing eh?), even if the sempron greatly outperforms the fastest celeron 64 while the celeron is using 64 bit and costs 3x the price of the sempron, people will still go for the celeron 64.

People will buy celerons because; A) They're cheap and B) they're from Intel. I'd suspect 64 bitness isn't something Intel is going to be talking about in advertising for quite some time to come. Besides If Sempron is a neutered A64, making sure it has AMD 64 compliancy would be just to NOT neuter it. All IMHO of course.

Personally I wouldn't mind a 90 nm Duron derivate for socket A but I guess that's not going to happen.

 

[Fox5]

Problem is if intel has a celeron 64. People will get it, just thinking of 64 bit the same way they think of mhz, as an indicator of power(plus there will eventually be 64 bit only software, future proofing eh?), even if the sempron greatly outperforms the fastest celeron 64 while the celeron is using 64 bit and costs 3x the price of the sempron, people will still go for the celeron 64.

People will buy celerons because; A) They're cheap and B) they're from Intel. I'd suspect 64 bitness isn't something Intel is going to be talking about in advertising for quite some time to come. Besides If Sempron is a neutered A64, making sure it has AMD 64 compliancy would be just to NOT neuter it. All IMHO of course.

Personally I wouldn't mind a 90 nm Duron derivate for socket A but I guess that's not going to happen.

I don't know, I've heard there will be a socket A sempron, just it won't be athlon 64 based. And it may not be as simple as not crippling them, I don't think it's like how the 9500 was a 9700 with its pipelines disabled, I think it's like how the 9600 is basically like half the chip the 9700 is. Millions of transistors missing, not disabled.

 

[mat]

imo intel wont have 64Bit Celerons for a while. (they still dont have Hyperthreading)
IMO AMD can wait with 64Bit Low End CPUs until Intel has them too (maybe a month or 2 earlier)

 

[Diplo]

Details of AMD's upcoming 32-bit microprocessor line, Sempron, have emerged courtesy of motherboard maker Jetway.

AMD has said officially that the first Semprons will ship in H2 2004, so any time from now on, in other words. However, it's believed that the company has an August ship-date in mind.

The first Semprons are expected to be Socket A parts. Jetway's site reveals the chips are fabbed at 130nm and contain 256KB of L2 cache. Their cores are run at 1.6V, down from the top-end Athlon XPs' 1.65V. They support 166MHz frontside bus clocks, so they will work with 333MHz DDR memory.

The site lists six Semprons running from 2200+ to 2800+. The clock multipliers provided yield core clock frequencies of 1.5GHz (2200+) to 2GHz (2800+). That's impressive in as much as the Athlon XP 2800+ with double the cache and the same FSB clock has to run at 2.25GHz to yield the same performance rating.

In short, Sempron yields better performance per clock than the older, more cache rich CPU family. That bodes well for the parts' thermal characteristics, if you can get the same performance from a slower chip.

AMD is expected to follow the initial Sempron release with a Socket 754 version later this quarter, along with a number of mobile parts. Like the Socket 939 Semprons believed to have been scheduled for Q1 2005 availability, the Socket 754 parts will essentially be Athlon 64 chips with reduced cache and AMD64 support turned off or burned out.

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2004/07/22/amd_socket_a_semprons/

 

[Tahir2]

In short, Sempron yields better performance per clock than the older, more cache rich CPU family. That bodes well for the parts' thermal characteristics, if you can get the same performance from a slower chip.

I believe that is incorrect. AMD have adjusted their Performance Rating for the Sempron line. The Sempron performance rating is for the value market compared to say a Duron running at x speed whereas the previous rating was for a Thunderbird running at x speed..I guess we will findout soon enough.

 

[Fox5]

In short, Sempron yields better performance per clock than the older, more cache rich CPU family. That bodes well for the parts' thermal characteristics, if you can get the same performance from a slower chip.

I believe that is incorrect. AMD have adjusted their Performance Rating for the Sempron line. The Sempron performance rating is for the value market compared to say a Duron running at x speed whereas the previous rating was for a Thunderbird running at x speed..I guess we will findout soon enough.

Yeah right, if any amd cpus were ever compared to thunderbird they were way off in performance rating. They couldn't even match a p4 at that speed towards the end, no way they were matching thunderbirds. And I doubt the new ones are marketted against durons, as durons perform better than the p4 per mhz, and the semprons wouldn't even match a p4 at the model number they have. Then again, I think they outperform celerons at that speed easily as well.

 

[Tahir2]

AMD Whitepaper on the subject.

It covers the AMD Athlon XP line of processors.
You can also read this thread over at hexus - it seems it all got a bit out of hand and a member got banned there so it is a bit of a touchy subject. Austin did have a point but AMD did not claim what most people think... and whether or not an AthlonXP 3200+ could match a Thunderbird 3.2GHz - you are right they couldnt unless you remember the old phrase, lies, damn lies, and statistics (see PDF).

The PR system AMD employed was because of the fact that clockspeed no longer was a true indication of performance with one major caveat, they only officially claimed the PR was going from one AMD CPU architecture to another. The XP line added more than SSE - it also included a larger TLB table.

And the Sempron is nothing more than an AthlonXP CPU with the FSB increased from 266 to 333. Comparing it to a Duron means it is marketted against the Celeron segment (the value end of the spectrum). Duron is dead. Long live Sempron.

 

[Fox5]

Bah, well that post explains why the xps had such conservative ratings compared to the p4s initially, but can you really say an athlon xp 3200 performs the same as a thunderbird 3.2ghz, when it doesn't even match a 3.2ghz p4 most of the time?

"And the Sempron is nothing more than an AthlonXP CPU with the FSB increased from 266 to 333."

I'm assuming you mean tbred? As the athlon xp line already had 333 FSBes, and even 1 400.
And I'm guessing semprons only have 256KB l2 cache like the tbreds?