BAFFLED!!??

[Beetle Bailey]

I was goofing around earlier and came across something that kind of puzzled me. I went into the system view and saw that this comp is only at 1.6ghz. Out of pure curiosity I went into the living room to check what it was running at. After redoing the Bios because of another weird find, it was only showing it to be a 1800+, I found that that little SKT A 2400+ was running at 1.98ghz. Don't get me wrong, it's not OC'ed and I'm very happy about it. But how is this so? I would have gussed that the newer comp would be a little faster at least. I'm talking about the one in my sig by the way. The only thing that is different is I now have 2gigs of OCZ GOLD, 900 PC7200 in it.
How is this so? I have noticed also that the SKT A seems to F@H a little faster also. That computer sees more daily use that the one I'm on now. I just don't understand it, Bailey.

[Computer-Ed]

Remember clock speed is not everything anymore. Since your sig is not there I could not see the system specs.

[Hitman]

Originally Posted by Beetle Bailey

I was goofing around earlier and came across something that kind of puzzled me. I went into the system view and saw that this comp is only at 1.6ghz. Out of pure curiosity I went into the living room to check what it was running at. After redoing the Bios because of another weird find, it was only showing it to be a 1800+, I found that that little SKT A 2400+ was running at 1.98ghz. Don't get me wrong, it's not OC'ed and I'm very happy about it. But how is this so? I would have gussed that the newer comp would be a little faster at least. I'm talking about the one in my sig by the way. The only thing that is different is I now have 2gigs of OCZ GOLD, 900 PC7200 in it.
How is this so? I have noticed also that the SKT A seems to F@H a little faster also. That computer sees more daily use that the one I'm on now. I just don't understand it, Bailey.

OK I am not following what your asking. Are you saying that your 3000+ is showing up as a 1800+ in the bios and running at 1.6ghz, then your 2400+ is running at 1.98ghz? You want to know why the 3000 is running slower then the 2400+?

If thats what your asking, then the answer is your 3000+ has the wrong settings in the bios and you need to go change it to the correct settings for a 3000+.

[Beetle Bailey]

Sorry for the confusion. The 3000 is a new AMD2 Sempron. The set-up in my sig. The SKT A is one that actually came from here. Well the board anyhow. It's an ECS K7S5A PRO with a 2400+ with 512 Ram. I just don't understand how this is faster than the modern AMD2 platform by specs. It out performs the Manila core hands down.

[polobunny]

Originally Posted by Beetle Bailey

Sorry for the confusion. The 3000 is a new AMD2 Sempron. The set-up in my sig. The SKT A is one that actually came from here. Well the board anyhow. It's an ECS K7S5A PRO with a 2400+ with 512 Ram. I just don't understand how this is faster than the modern AMD2 platform by specs. It out performs the Manila core hands down.

No.
The Sempron runs @ 1.6ghz and the Athlon 2400+ runs at 1.98ghz but it doesn't mean the later beats the first.
How can you judge the Athlon is beating the Sempron here, except for the clock speed? Because as Computer-Ed said, clock speed is not everything anymore.
For a good example, take a new Core 2 Duo E6300. It runs at 1.86ghz and is better than both processors. ;)

[Beetle Bailey]

Well, it folds a little faster. It burns DVD's faster, it also gets more use during the day and still folds faster. I'm not really complaining, I just don't understand how this is. I know I have both computers configured correctly, and that they both are running very well. I was just a little taken back on the performance of them.

[polobunny]

Well you have to consider the Sempron series is entry level from AMD on the AM2 socket, while the Athlon series is/was the top dog. So even if it's technically 2 generations after (if saying that socket 754 and socket AM2 are two different generations, even though there's barely any improvement from switching Sempron's from DDR to DDR2) it's not abnormal to see such results. You have to take into consideration other factors too. The motherboard chipset, the RAM bandwidth, the hard drive and optical drive and even the drivers can and will give different performances.