I posted earlier with a question about if my processor was useable in an Abit AN7 board I put into an older computer.

I've decided to just buy a new old stock processor off of eBay but since Socket A is older, I don't know what the last best processor was.

I read old articles that said the Athlon XPs overheated and had no protection when they did but did that ever change. The Semprons are slower but did they have the same problems?

You obviously don't know your CPUs.

CPUs do NOT overheat on their own. 99% of the time they overheat due to improper cooling & that's usually because the heatsink was installed incorrectly (backwards for example). The Athlon/AthlonXP/Sempron is no more likely to overheat than any other CPU, provided it's installed properly with adequate cooling. The protection for the socket A CPU is built into the motherboard, not the CPU....there is usually a shutdown temperature setting in the BIOS that can be adjusted. Until the P4 came along, CPU's didn't have overheat protection.

There were several different CPU cores used over the life of the Athlon/AthlonXP...Thunderbird, Palomino, Thoroughbred, Thorton, & Barton. The T-bird was used in the Athlon & came in either 200FSB or 266FSB versions....it had 256k L2 cache. Your Duron is based on the Spitfire core, which is a basically a T-bird core with only 64k L2 cache.

The Palomino was the 1st AXP core & was strictly 266FSB w/256k L2 cache. The T-bird & Palomino ran hot because of their larger cores & higher voltage requirements (1.75v).

The T-bred was a redesigned smaller core with lower voltage requirements (1.50-1.65v)...it came in either 266FSB or 333FSB versions & still had 256k L2 cache.

The Barton core has 512k L2 cache & came in both 333FSB & 400FSB versions. The Thorton core was basically a Barton core with 1/2 it's L2 cache disabled.

Semprons are NOT slower than AthonXP's...basically they're the same thing. The AXP was renamed "Sempron" because AMD wanted to use the "Athlon" name exclusively for the Athlon64 series. The A64 became the high end CPU, the Duron was dropped completely, so the Sempron became the "value" CPU. Actually, Semprons are faster in many cases because they run at 333FSB...most of the AXP's prior to the Barton core only ran at 266FSB. The majority of Semprons are simply T-bred cores reconfigured to run at 333FSB. There are some Thorton & Barton core Semprons, but the vast majority are T-breds.

FLATURIN - Hand-to-mouth goodness. It's good!

I don't know how much you're willing to spend, but here's a site that still stocks a lot of socket A CPUs:

http://www.starmicro.net/SearchResu...

However, what you should keep in mind is that a decent socket 754 nforce3 board & A64 combo can be had for less than the cost of an AXP/Barton CPU. And even a low end A64 system will kick the crap out of the best AXP system.

Look what roughly $75 will get ya:

Athlon 64 3000+ DIY Kit w/Mainboard CPU Heat Sink/Fan @ $73

Athlon 64 3200+ Venice 2.2GHz @ $36

BIOSTAR K8NHA Grand Socket 754 NVIDIA nForce3 250Gb @ $38

MSI K8N Neo V2.0 H nForce3 250 Socket 754 @ $35

FLATURIN - Hand-to-mouth goodness. It's good!

Thanks for the replies. The first thing I saw about overheating was on wikipedia.org, but wasn't sure it was correct concidering the source. A few google searches turned up similar articles, I think the one I saw was on digit-life.com and I noticed the statement "The Athlon XP has no any catastrophic overheating protection. Why didn't AMD provide such protection as it isn't beyond their power? ." Although I've read what a few people said about the Sempron being just as good, it was mentioned that they replaced the Duron and weren't as fast as the Athlon XPs. If they are just as good, why would someone pay more money for an Athlon XP if it didn't perform better?

As far as getting a newer motherboard with a different socket, I would if this was my computer. For my computer, I've been wanting to get a newer Core 2 Duo processor. I have been using, and like, the AMD CPUs, however I have seen better reviews for the Core 2s.

"Although I've read what a few people said about the Sempron being just as good, it was mentioned that they replaced the Duron and weren't as fast as the Athlon XPs"

I had hoped I explained that, but I guess it didn't come out clearly. The Sempron became the "new" budget CPU because the Duron was eliminated.

Most Semprons are based on the Tbred core, the exact same core as the AXP, but the FSB was jumped up from 266MHZ to 333MHz. This prompted AMD to change the PR ratings for the Sempron & there was a lot of confusion when this happened. For example, the AXP 2400+ runs at 2.0GHz (at 266FSB), but the Sempron 2400+ only runs at 1.67GHz (at 333FSB). People looked at the 1.67GHz vs 2.0GHz difference & assumed the Sempron was slower, not taking into account that the faster FSB of the Sempron balances things out. Does that make sense?

"If they are just as good, why would someone pay more money for an Athlon XP if it didn't perform better?"

Because they're stupid? LOL! Actually, it depends on the CPU. You have to carefully compare the specs.

FLATURIN - Hand-to-mouth goodness. It's good!

Don't get your source from wikipedia, because it's not an accurate source of info.