AMD Sempron Vs Celeron-M?

[Super Warrior]

Until now i've always been an Intel guy, only buying/building Celeron PCs. Recently Dell's budget laptop line seems to have switched entirely from Celeron-M to Mobile AMD Sempron.

I decided to take a chance on Dell's Vostro 1000 laptop, because everything else looked Great, i was looking to upgrade and the price was nice(would've chosen a Celeron-M if given the option of coarse).

So as my first one, what are the general opinion on AMD processors? So far its working pretty well(though my hardware device manager claims not to recognize it fully).

[xzarkad]

Both AMD and intel are producing processors for years and years now, and there is not good or bad. In the past AMD had the name of having a too high temperature. That was in the nineties of the last century, and before the first Athlon generation was introduced. Then the intel P4 processor got the name of having a too high temperature. That is also something from the past and since then improved generations have been released.
I am a dedicated AMD supporter. But if I am honest:
Both are stabile. Both do their job without a problem. Some years intel is having better performance, and some years AMD is having better performance.
I would not ask ay-one how intel is performing as I know their processors do what they are designed for. And so, it should not be asked how AMD is performing as these processors also do what they are designed for.

[JohnnyMalaria]

The question I'd ask is: Should I get a Dell laptop?

I have two recent experiences (i.e., two new laptops) and, after using both extensively, I'd say no.

[Super Warrior]

The question I'd ask is: Should I get a Dell laptop?

I have two recent experiences (i.e., two new laptops) and, after using both extensively, I'd say no.

I'm on my second Dell laptop right now. The first one, an Inspiron B120, was Great. I only upgraded because i wanted internal wireless and a larger screen.

My current/second one, a Vostro 1000, has been awesome so far. I choose Dell because their systems are reliable, laptops are modular being EASY to fix/upgrade, and lowest new laptop prices.

[edDV]

The trend is Intel owns the high end desktop (OEM deals) so AMD takes refuge by making better deals for low margin, lower end desktops and laptops integrating more graphics support into the cpu package. Intel doesn't want AMD to go a way so better to let them have the low end. This is about OEM deals. For retail parts pricing they are more evenly matched.

Meanwhile AMD has upped competition in the server area with the latest multi-core Opterons.

[winifreid]

Yo may want to look at the amd turion. I think they are a little faster and use less power. I have one, but I haven't used a Semperon in a laptop. I had one in my desktop, but I up graced to a venice.

[jagabo]

Something built around the E2160?

http://www.tomshardware.com/2007/09/12/pentium_dual_core/

[yoda313]

I've had both intel and amd over the years. I have a celeron 2.66ghz in my emachine that works well if a little underpowered since its not a full intel.

I currently have a amd 64 3800 2.4ghz single core in my vista hp desktop. Seems to work very well. Nice loading times and does gaming nicely too.

I'd say like the others that unless you have a very specific need in mind either will work very well. Then again perceived differences are probably personal biases anyway. I guess I'm saying its more a flip of the coin on price now then anything else. Unless your main concern is speed and then you should just get whichever has the highest rating.

[Super Warrior]

Yo may want to look at the amd turion. I think they are a little faster and use less power. I have one, but I haven't used a Semperon in a laptop. I had one in my desktop, but I up graced to a venice.

I could have paid more and got a much nicer AMD, like the turon stuff you mentioned. But i don't need anything Super-high powered, which is why i've always had Celeron's in the past and not spent more for a Pentium CPU.

Sempron seems to be the "celeron" of the AMD line-up.