CPUBoss Review Our evaluation of 145 vs 965 among desktop CPUs

Performance

Benchmark performance using all cores

PCMark 8 Home 3.0 Accelerated, PassMark and 1 more

Single-core Performance

Individual core benchmark performance

PassMark (Single Core), Geekbench 3 Single Core and 1 more

Integrated Graphics

Integrated GPU performance for graphics

Fire Strike

Integrated Graphics (OpenCL)

Integrated GPU performance for parallel computing

CompuBench 1.5 Bitcoin mining and 4 more

Performance per Watt

How efficiently does the processor use electricity?

Fire Strike, CompuBench 1.5 Bitcoin mining and 11 more

Value

Are you paying a premium for performance?

Fire Strike, CompuBench 1.5 Bitcoin mining and 11 more

4.2

CPUBoss Score

Combination of all six facets

Winner
AMD Phenom II X4 965 

CPUBoss recommends the AMD Phenom II X4 965  based on its performance and overclocking.

See full details

Cast your vote Do you agree or disagree with CPUBoss?

Thanks for adding your opinion. Follow us on Facebook to stay up to date with the latest news!
VS

Differences What are the advantages of each

Front view of AMD Sempron 145

Reasons to consider the
AMD Sempron 145

Report a correction
Much lower typical power consumption 36.56W vs 152.93W 4.2x lower typical power consumption
Much better performance per watt 2.06 pt/W vs 1.08 pt/W More than 90% better performance per watt
Much more l2 cache per core 1 MB/core vs 0.5 MB/core 2x more l2 cache per core
Much lower annual home energy cost 10.84 $/year vs 54.06 $/year 5x lower annual home energy cost
Much lower annual commercial energy cost 39.42 $/year vs 152.42 $/year 3.9x lower annual commercial energy cost
Higher Maximum operating temperature 63 °C vs 62 °C Almost the same
Front view of AMD Phenom II X4 965

Reasons to consider the
AMD Phenom II X4 965

Report a correction
Much more l3 cache 6 MB vs 0 MB Compared to all cpus, 6 MB l3 cache is just OK
Much more l2 cache 2 MB vs 1 MB 2x more l2 cache; more data can be stored in the l2 cache for quick access later
Is unlocked Yes vs No Somewhat common; An unlocked multiplier allows for easier overclocking
Much higher clock speed 3.4 GHz vs 2.8 GHz More than 20% higher clock speed
More cores 4 vs 1 3 more cores; run more applications at once
More threads 4 vs 1 3 more threads
Much better PassMark score 5,916 vs 800 Around 7.5x better PassMark score
Much better geekbench 2 (32-bit) score 5,974 vs 1,332 Around 4.5x better geekbench 2 (32-bit) score
Much more l3 cache per core 1.5 MB/core vs 0 MB/core Compared to all cpus, 1.5 MB/core l3 cache per core is just OK

Benchmarks Real world tests of Sempron 145 vs Phenom II X4 965

GeekBench 3 (Multi-core) Data courtesy Primate Labs

GeekBench 3 (Single core) Data courtesy Primate Labs

GeekBench 3 (AES single core) Data courtesy Primate Labs

Sempron 145
111,900 MB/s
Phenom II X4 965
137,800 MB/s

GeekBench (32-bit) Data courtesy Primate Labs

GeekBench

PassMark Data courtesy Passmark

PassMark (Single Core)

Reviews Word on the street

Specifications Full list of technical specs

summary

Sempron 145  vs
Phenom II X4 965 
Clock speed 2.8 GHz 3.4 GHz
Cores Single core Quad core
Socket type
AM3
Is unlocked No Yes

features

Has a NX bit Yes Yes
Has virtualization support Yes Yes
Instruction set extensions
SSE4a
SSE2
MMX
SSE3
SSE
3DNow!
Supports dynamic frequency scaling Yes Yes

integrated graphics

GPU None None
Label N/A N/A
Latest DirectX N/A N/A
Number of displays supported N/A N/A
GPU clock speed N/A N/A
Turbo clock speed N/A N/A
3DMark06 N/A N/A

details

Sempron 145  vs
Phenom II X4 965 
Architecture x86-64 x86-64
Threads 1 4
L2 cache 1 MB 2 MB
L2 cache per core 1 MB/core 0.5 MB/core
L3 cache 0 MB 6 MB
L3 cache per core 0 MB/core 1.5 MB/core
Manufacture process 45 nm 45 nm
Max CPUs 1 1
Voltage range 0.82 - 1.35V 0.85 - 1.43V
Operating temperature Unknown - 63°C Unknown - 62°C

overclocking

Overclock popularity 9 22
Overclocked clock speed 4.05 GHz 4.05 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Water) 4.28 GHz 4.22 GHz
PassMark (Overclocked) 1,763.8 3,136.7
Overclocked clock speed (Air) 4.05 GHz 4.05 GHz

power consumption

TDP 45W 140W
Annual home energy cost 10.84 $/year 54.06 $/year
Annual commercial energy cost 39.42 $/year 152.42 $/year
Performance per watt 2.06 pt/W 1.08 pt/W
Typical power consumption 36.56W 152.93W

bus

Clock speed 2,000 MHz 2,000 MHz
AMD Sempron 145
Report a correction
AMD Phenom II X4 965
Report a correction

Read more

Comments

Showing 1 comment.
Both are great processors and both can perform optimally, but more cores are for multimedia tasks such as encoding or rendering. Games and applications usually uses 1 core.
comments powered by Disqus