Verified answer

Of course its better to have a dual core. The extra cores double, quadruple, and even septuple the performance of that same processor as a single core.

A quad core quadruples the power of a processor, a six core processor septuples the power of the single core, and a dual core doubles the power of a single core running at the same speed.. It means that your dual core was in fact, running at essentially the same parameters as a single core 6.4 Ghz.

While your sempron runs at simply 2.8 ghz. The Intel core was at least 2 times better than the sempron.

Heck, even if the intel core was a single core, it woudl be better than the sempron. there are some super cheap, maybe 50 bucks graphic cards that are super nice and better than your onboard graphics.

There are also affordable, better intel cores to replace your dead one. Intel cores are almost always a better buy than AMD

I don't see how he'd put an AMD CPU into an Intel board. He would've had to change the motherboard, which is probably why you're seeing a new OB GPU.

Anyway, the Sempron range was introduced solely to kill the Intel Celeron. It's a value chip and won't ever amount to anything beyond the basics. I'd be very surprised if there was any sort of gaming power in it. I know there's benchmarks out there, but if you look closely, you'll see that all of the high quality options are down or turned off. It's very likely that your dual core would blow the Sempron away.

slightly ironic this lol i,m determining to purchase a sparkling pc quickly & i will,t come to a determination yet wether the Amd4800 or the E6600 yet sturdy success besides despite u come to a determination I,m a Amd fan yet i might merely choose for the E6600 myself.What i comprehend is that if i became u i,d choose for extra skill m8 than the 4200 & E6300 if ur into video games like me.

Intel chips run windows better. also i could never own a computer with a chipset name so close to "Semprini"