AMD Sempron 2650 vs Athlon II X2 250 |
Released December, 2013
AMD Sempron 2650
- 1.4 GHz
- Dual core
Reasons to buy the AMD Sempron 2650
 | Has a built-in GPU Yes | | Much higher Maximum operating temperature 95 °C |
| | Much lower typical power consumption 20.31W | | Newer manufacturing process 28 nm |
VS
Released June, 2009
AMD Athlon II X2 250
- 3 GHz
- Dual core
Reasons to buy the Athlon II X2 250
| | Much higher clock speed 3 GHz | | Much more l2 cache 2 MB |
| | Much better PassMark score 1,750 | | Much better PassMark (Single core) score 1,008 |
Cast your vote Do you agree or disagree with CPUBoss?
VS
Differences What are the advantages of each
| |||||||
| Has a built-in GPU | Yes | vs | No | Somewhat common; A separate graphics adapter is not required | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Much higher Maximum operating temperature | 95 °C | vs | 74 °C | Around 30% higher Maximum operating temperature | |||
| Much lower typical power consumption | 20.31W | vs | 52.81W | 2.6x lower typical power consumption | |||
| Newer manufacturing process | 28 nm | vs | 32 nm | A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running processor | |||
| Much lower annual home energy cost | 6.02 $/year | vs | 15.66 $/year | 2.6x lower annual home energy cost | |||
| Much lower annual commercial energy cost | 21.9 $/year | vs | 56.94 $/year | 2.6x lower annual commercial energy cost | |||
| Newer | Dec, 2013 | vs | Jun, 2009 | Release date over 4 years later | |||
| |||||||
| Much higher clock speed | 3 GHz | vs | 1.4 GHz | Around 2.2x higher clock speed | |||
| 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 | |||
| Much better PassMark score | 1,750 | vs | 915 | More than 90% better PassMark score | |||
| Much better PassMark (Single core) score | 1,008 | vs | 534 | Around 90% better PassMark (Single core) score | |||
| Much more l2 cache per core | 1 MB/core | vs | 0.5 MB/core | 2x more l2 cache per core | |||
Report a correction
Benchmarks Real world tests of Sempron 2650 vs Athlon II X2 250
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
PassMark Data courtesy Passmark
PassMark (Single Core)
Specifications Full list of technical specs
summary | Sempron 2650 | vs | Athlon II X2 250 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Clock speed | 1.4 GHz | 3 GHz | |
| Turbo clock speed | None | 3.6 GHz | |
| Cores | Dual core | Dual core | |
| Socket type | |||
| FS1b | |||
| AM3 | |||
| Is unlocked | No | No | |
features | |||
| Has a NX bit | Yes | Yes | |
| Has virtualization support | Yes | Yes | |
| Instruction set extensions | |||
| SSE4a | |||
| AVX 1.1 | |||
| SSE2 | |||
| F16C | |||
| MMX | |||
| XOP | |||
| AVX | |||
| SSE3 | |||
| SSE | |||
| BMI1 | |||
| AMD64 | |||
| SSE4.1 | |||
| FMA4 | |||
| FMA3 | |||
| SSE4.2 | |||
| ABM | |||
| CVT16 | |||
| AMD-V | |||
| Supplemental SSE3 | |||
| AES | |||
| TBM | |||
| Supports dynamic frequency scaling | Yes | Yes | |
power consumption | |||
| TDP | 25W | 65W | |
| Annual home energy cost | 6.02 $/year | 15.66 $/year | |
| Annual commercial energy cost | 21.9 $/year | 56.94 $/year | |
| Performance per watt | 9.03 pt/W | 1.79 pt/W | |
| Typical power consumption | 20.31W | 52.81W | |
details | Sempron 2650 | vs | Athlon II X2 250 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Architecture | x86-64 | x86-64 | |
| Threads | 2 | 2 | |
| L2 cache | 1 MB | 2 MB | |
| L2 cache per core | 0.5 MB/core | 1 MB/core | |
| Manufacture process | 28 nm | 32 nm | |
| Max CPUs | 1 | 1 | |
| Voltage range | 0.5 - 1.4V | 0.85 - 1.43V | |
| Operating temperature | Unknown - 95°C | Unknown - 74°C | |
overclocking | |||
| Overclock popularity | 0 | 25 | |
integrated graphics | |||
| GPU | GPU | None | |
| Label | Radeon HD 8240 | N/A | |
| Latest DirectX | 11.0 | N/A | |
| GPU clock speed | 128 MHz | N/A | |
| Turbo clock speed | 400 MHz | N/A | |
 AMD Sempron 2650  Report a correction |  AMD Athlon II X2 250 Report a correction |
Follow us
Compare
Related Comparisons
 | VS |  |
| $125 | ||
| 250 vs 3220 | ||
| | VS |  |
| $179 | ||
| 250 vs E8400 | ||
| | VS |  |
| $125 | ||
| 250 vs E7500 | ||
| | VS |  |
| 250 vs 5000+ | ||
| | VS |  |
| $200 | ||
| 250 vs 965 | ||
| | VS |  |
| 250 vs Q6600 | ||
| | VS |  |
| 250 vs 550 | ||
Popular Comparisons
 | VS |  |
| $305 | $300 | |
| W3520 vs 2500 | ||
 | VS |  |
| $272 | $350 | |
| 4790K vs 6700K | ||
 | VS |  |
| $281 | ||
| 4200U vs 6410 | ||
 | VS |  |
| $281 | ||
| 6200U vs 7th Gen A9-9410 | ||
 | VS |  |
| $275 | $161 | |
| 4005U vs N3540 | ||
 | VS |  |
| $134 | $225 | |
| 847 vs 3217U | ||
 | VS |  |
| $180 | ||
| 3470 vs 5200 | ||
