Toms Hardware Processor If The Sempron Is Considered A Bad Buget Processor Then The Core 2 Duo Is Close?

If the sempron is considered a bad buget processor then the core 2 duo is close? - toms hardware processor

From my expreince many many many many things to look Benchmarks Core 2 Duo is only 2 times faster than the Sempron.
Sempron 3400 + is seriously not much worse compared to a Core 2 Duo E6600

1. Go to you tube and watch some videos from a Sempron to play Crysis, you'll see that the Sempron will be given at least 17 frames per second without a very good GPU. So if you're playing Crysis Core 2 Duo, you will notice that the Core 2 Duo system plays Crysis at 23 to 26 frames per second, 2 times faster than a Sempron is.

2. Toms Hardware CPU trees when you go to the PCMark 2005 CPU, and you'll see that the core is 2 duoe6600 PCMark 4300 to 2005 and Sempron 3400 + CPU 2700 when the Core Duo is almost 2 times faster.

3. Then, the Sempron is not much worse, after all, then a Core 2 Duo. The Core 2 Duo is much faster than a Sempron. Also in the PCMark 2005 CPU Core Duo is almost 2 times faster than it means that if both CPU's been a very hectic and Core Duo is a 5 min Sempron take 8 min. WhI am not a significant increase in performance at all. Basically, the Athlon is better value for money compared to the Core 2 Duo. If I prove otherwise, like the Core 2 Duo is actually more than 2 times faster.

This question is worth 10 points.