Is an AMD sempron processor a dual core processor?
912121
Sempron is Amd's budget priced processor. It is'nt a dual core.
228195
right click on my computer and you ll see type of your processor.if it s written there "P4 D" then it s dual
733421
A dual-core CPU combines two independent processors and their respective caches and cache controllers onto a single silicon chip, or integrated circuit. IBM's POWER4 was the first microprocessor to incorporate 2-cores on a single die. Various dual-core CPUs are being developed by companies such as Motorola, Intel and AMD, and are scheduled to appear in consumer products in 2005. \n\n\nIt's like having two processors, so you can do more cpu-intensive work at the same time, such as playing a video game while encoding a video, where before it would just really not work at all because one would be taking all of the cpu power, usually the video encoding, leaving your video game choppy.
52421
There's no contest, dual or single core, the Athlon 64 is by far the best of the bunch. If you want the best, choose an AMD Athlon 64 in dual core formation.
1047629
I'd say it depends on what you need to do.  BUT, I prefer Intel processors for laptops.  Someone said that AMD processors run hotter than Intel, they do.  And AMD processors are not as power efficient as Intel when it comes to mobile processors.  That being said, AMD has a dual core 64-bit Turion processor for laptops.  This means you can run 64-bit applications but note that there aren't many, save for Windows x64 and some versions of Linux.  That being said, many programs are not supported under 64-bit environments, those that use 16-bit installers for example.  Most computers with 64-bit processors just come with Windows XP home or Pro (32-bit) which is fine and what I reccommend, only you can't run 64-bit programs in that case (again, not many out there).\n\nNow we come down to it.  It turns out that the Core Duo processors from Intel are faster and more efficient than the AMD Turion 64x2.  You decide, but I'm sold on Intel as far as laptops are concerned.  Note, I still prefer AMD when it comes to desktops because AMD desktop processors still crush Intel.  Intel has caught up in the mobile world, it'll be a while before I trust my desktop to one.
72839
For now, no, but AMD is hard at working on new processors that support the M2 socket (940 pin) and all the processors that support the M2 socket will support DDR2.  \n\nMost AMD chips have on-die memory controllers and the current lineup of AMD processors only support DDR memory.  It's not a situation as with Intel where you can mix and match chipsets so that the type of memory supported by the chip is independent from the CPU.  With AMD processors (all but the old socket A processors that did not have on-die memory controller) you are stuck with DDR.
523322
Yes...all kinds...Here's just one of hundreds...\nhttp://www.devhardware.com/c/b/Computer-Processors/
465808
The difference between a Sempron and an Athlon is cache size and also, Semprons are not 64-bit processors but all Athlons are nowadays.  Semprons are comparable to Intel Celerons and Athlon 64s are comparable to the Intel Pentium 4/D.  AMD also has the Athlon 64x2 chips which aren't really comparable to anything made by Intel because Intel has yet to produce a competent dual core processor.\n\nTo keep it simple a Sempron 3100+ will be slower than an Athlon 64 3000+ because the Sempron has less cache it will be slower than the Athlon even if the Athlon is rated at a slower clock speed.\n\nAMD is also working on quad core chips which are due out later this year and Intel is still fumbling around 64-bit and dual core, beat by AMD again, Intel just sucks no wonder they sit at the bottom of every single benchmark.  Don't buy an Intel chip and don't even bother with a Sempron.  Buy an Athlon 64 or Athlon 64x2.  It's a little hard to tell you what to get because prices will drop and new hardware will be out by the time you get around to building your system.  So, check back here in August and I (or someone) will tell you exactly what to buy.
249973
Yes I have a Sempron Sad to say and you can Mismatch any type of PC3200 DDR 400 in a sempron all you have to do is add it in a available memory bank and if one is not available you will have to take a old one out and replace with a higher capacity one.
450312
sempron has a bigger cache, typically for gamers and hard core pc users.\nceleron is for office related kind of stuff.
410382
The past 16 months or so have seen an unprecedented number of genuine breakthroughs in the field of processor design, especially from AMD. Not only did that company introduce a truly compatible 64-bit processor design which has since dominated the high-end desktop PC market, but it also pioneered the on-die memory controller which has given the Athlon 64 and Opteron chips a leg-up in performance over Intel's offerings. Intel has since adopted 64-bit compatibility also, and now both companies are releasing processors with another brand new feature, dual-cores.\n\nDual-core processors work pretty much as you'd expect them to. At their most basic, both Intel and AMD have taken two mostly (or in the case of Intel, fully) functional processor cores and joined them together in a single processor die. Each core functions and processes data independently, and the two are co-coordinated by the operating system software. \n\nIn this article, PCSTATS is going to focus on both company's versions of this technology, how it works, and the kind of performance boost you can expect from it. Currently only certain of AMD's Opteron server-class processors are available with dual cores, but very shortly AMD will release the Athlon 64 X2 line of dual-core desktop processors. Intel has taken the opposite approach, already releasing the 'Pentium Extreme Edition 840' desktop dual-core chip, while its 'Pentium D' and dual-Xeons lines are not far behind.   \n\n\nSince dual-core processors are essentially a multi-processor system in a convenient package, let's start by looking at some of the multi-processor technologies which have contributed to AMD and Intel's newest products.\n\nSMP (Symmetric Multi-Processing) \n\nSMP is the most common approach to creating a multi-processor system, in which two or more separate processors work together on the same motherboard. The processors co-ordinate and share information through the system bus, and the processors arbitrate the workload amongst themselves with the help of the motherboard chipset and the operating system. \n\nThe OS treats both processors more or less equally, assigning work as needed. Both AMD and Intel's new dual-core chips can be considered SMP capable (internally). AMD's dual-core Opteron server processors can be linked to other dual-core chips externally also, but this capability is not present in either company's desktop dual-core lines. \n\nThe major limitations of SMP have to do with software and operating system support. Many operating systems (such as Windows XP Home) are not SMP capable and will not make use of the second physical processor. Also, most modern programs are single-threaded, meaning that there is only ever one current set of linked instructions and data for them. This means that only one processor can effectively work on them at a time. Multi-threaded programs do exist, and can take better advantage of the potential power of dual- or multi-CPU configurations, but are not as common as we might like. \n\nNo other current mainstream desktop processors are SMP capable, as Intel and AMD tend to restrict cutting edge technologies to the higher-end server processors such as the Opteron and Xeon. In the past though, mainstream processors have been SMP capable, most notably the later Intel Pentium 3 processors.
323494
That's a pretty good question. The Intel Core Duo  has a different archtecture than AMD Athlon XP, so they will perform better or worse depending on the applications you're running.\n\nA 1.66 GHz Pentium M (Dothan CPU) is approximately the same speed as a 1.6-2.0GHz Athlon 64 and about the speed of a 2800+ - 3000+ Athlon XP. The core duo will definitely be much faster in multitasking situations, but for the most part, you won't see a large difference in speed compared to the AMD Athlon XP 2700+.\n\nHere's a benchmark from Tomshardware that compares the core duo to the Athlon X2 desktop processors:\n\nhttp://www.tomshardware.com/2006/04/24/dual_core_intel_processors_for_low/
422283
Certain boards, processor combos only support up to a given amount of memory. I have a 1.8 Ghz AMD Sempron processor and it supports up to 4 GB of memory. If you want to know how much it can support look in your manual or contact the manufacturer or their website.
908093
definitely intel core 2 duo...but if u r willing to wait a while opt for intel quad core....also to get more info on the processors try google...type.....''benchmark: Name of processor''\n\nin the market intel dual core and core 2 duo are available...but remember that dual core has only 1 processor and the other is a logical unit, while core 2 duo has 2 physical processors
55650
In the land of server and workstation procesors, it is the AMD Opteron. Even better is the fact that it is dual core and can be run in dual proc mode (2x2=4 cores!!!), thus enabling wonderful multitasking abilities (and support for multithreaded applications such as DVD Shrink.\n\nIn the land of gaming processors, it is the almighty FX-60. This dual core gaming processor is the last CPU coming out for the soon-to-be-outdated socket 939 for AMD (its being replaced by socket f/M2). If you dont want dual core (no games currently are optimized for dual core but some programs are), then go with the much cheaper FX-57.\n\nThere isnt a real answer to your question. The FX-60 easily outperforms the Intel Extreme Edition 955 in most things (like games), but in terms of sheer clock speed, the intel processors are on top (even if the AMD processors are'quicker')
186259
The Pentium D is a 64 bit chip. The AMD Athlon 64X2 is a dual-core processor while the Athlon 64 is a single core.
223064
D = Dual Core. Two cores are better than one and the price is right. It's like having two CPU's instead of one to a degree, it's not totally the same as there is the I/O bottleneck.