AMD uses an oddball naming convention when it comes to processors. The only Sempron (so far as I am aware) that runs at 1.6 GHz is the 2400+... Is this the model you have?

The fastest is the Sempron 2800+ which clocks in at 2 GHz.

BillyBob I don't know what you did the last time you formatted but it's totally simplistic. Just save your data files then click your "Start button then "run" and type cmd. When you get a Dos prompt (C:\) type:
format C:/q
This will format the whole drive in the blink of an eye. Then install 98 on there.
Then on the new drive install XP, be sure to select FAT32 format or XP won't be able to see the 98 drive and vice versa. What's the problem there? it takes maybe 1/2 hour and you don't even have to stand by other than putting in the product key and the regional settings. It will then notice 98 and set up your dual boot. At this point you can partition the 80 gig XP drive and then use the partition space for data dump apps and games. As I stated before I set up mine 20 gig for the XP OS partition with minimal programs installed there, 30 gig for installed apps and 30 gig for games and data dump. It's really totally simple. I format my entire system about every 5-6 months and general system maintenance and it literally purrs. In fact I just did it this past weekend and had everything set up Sunday (ofcourse I didn't hve to do the partitioning stuff as I only formatted the 98 drive and the XP partition of the 80 gig.

If XP is on an NTFS partition, Windows 98 will not see it.

I have a friend who was trying to set up a dual boot with two Win 98 partitions. I told her it wouldn't work. I didn't think she'd be able to install her Win 98 to D:, but she did. The thing was, she didn't get the choice of which to boot to. After she installed Win 98 to D:, the computer would only boot from D: and not from C:.

If you get Partition Magic, it should allow you to keep your current XP installation, if that's what you want to do. Partition Magic was recently "acquired" by Norton and is up to version 8.0. There are demo versions available.

That's because an AMD at 1.6 GHz is so much faster than a Pentium at 1.6 GHz. You can't compare the two processors GHz for GHz.

No, I have the Semtron 2300+ which show running at 1.6 GHz

The question is.....why is my 2.3 Gig CPU running at a lower rate than my 2.0 Gig AMD Athlon which is shown running at 1.7 GHz??

Doesn't sound right to me.

Because it's not a 2.3 GHz processor. AMD's naming conventions don't follow the Intel format. The numbers following the processor model have nothing to do with the clock frequency .

A sempron 2300 is rated at 1.583 GHz.

I don't find the ratings on the AMD site - but I did find another source - you'll find the rated clock speeds at the bottom of the page.

AMD Sempron

Use to be the case - but, not anymore. HyperThreading changed the whole mix.

BillyBob email me and I'll lead you through it if you want to go my route without having to buy Partition Magic. As I stated the way I told you is the easiest and more fool proof, letting XP do all the work. You won't have the problem Jenny stated if you set XP up as Fat32 on the reinstall.

Bill

2300+ does not mean the processor is running at 2.3 GHz. You can't gauge speed by directly comparing the GHz of the newer Athlon processors to those on the older processors. Their effective speed is faster than their clock speed. That's why AMD came up with their "+" system of denoting processor speed instead of reporting the GHz. A 2300+ AMD processor will run at the same speed as an older 2.3 GHz AMD processor (if they made them that fast) even though it's clocked at only 1.6 GHz.

For comparison, a 3200+ AMD Barton processor runs at 2.2 GHz.

It's still the case. You have to compare a 3.2 GHz Pentium with an AMD 3200+, not with a 3.2 GHz AMD (which doesn't exist, but if it did, it would be way faster than the Pentium).

They're both good processors, without a doubt - but, Intel's HT Technology has closed the gap.

Intel/HT processors are capable of executing two instructions per clock cycle (which is exactly what allowed AMD make the claim of better throughput at lower clock speeds).

O.K., let's all back off and see the question one more time.........

I'm comparing two AMD CPUs; NOT AMD compared to Pentium.

Since you can't compare the stated (2.0 / 2.3 rating); I KNOW they don't run at THAT speed.

I thought you could at least compare what they appear to be running as (1.7 / 1.6)

Is, or is not, the supposedly higher rated (2.3) Semtron running slower than the lower rated (2.0)?

Llewton.......

Thanks, but just not ready to tackle reinstalling XP again and all my programs again. Already had to reactivate it once and the more you do that the closer you get to having the hassle of justifying to Bill Gates why you've done what you've done.

InlandAZ........

O.K., trying to find the rating now for the AMD 2000

Once I see that I think I'll know what's going on with these two processors.

Actually not true BillyBob I've formatted and reinstalled XP about 6 times already and no activation problem at all.

Bill

If your Athlon is a T-Bred XP 2000+ here ya go -
AthlonXP 2000+ Processor Speeds

At the bottom of the page. (1.667 GHz)

InlandAZ........

That's about right for my 2.0MHz CPU but it's the Sempron CPU reading that's bugging me.