0 Comments
| AMD Sempron 2800+ vs Athlon 64 3200+ |
Released July, 2004
AMD Sempron 2800+
- 1.6 GHz
- Single core
Reasons to buy the AMD Sempron 2800+
![]() | Much newer manufacturing process 90 nm | ![]() | Significantly lower typical power consumption 50.38W |
![]() | Significantly lower annual home energy cost 14.94 $/year | ![]() | Significantly lower annual commercial energy cost 54.31 $/year |
VS
Released May, 2006
AMD Athlon 64 3200+
- 2 GHz
- Single core
Reasons to buy the Athlon 64 3200+
![]() | Much more l2 cache 1 MB | ![]() | Significantly higher clock speed 2 GHz |
![]() | Has virtualization support Yes | ![]() | Much more l2 cache per core 1 MB/core |
Cast your vote Do you agree or disagree with CPUBoss?
VS
Differences What are the advantages of each
| |||||||
Much newer manufacturing process | 90 nm | vs | 130 nm | A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running processor | |||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Significantly lower typical power consumption | 50.38W | vs | 72.31W | More than 30% lower typical power consumption | |||
Significantly lower annual home energy cost | 14.94 $/year | vs | 21.44 $/year | More than 30% lower annual home energy cost | |||
Significantly lower annual commercial energy cost | 54.31 $/year | vs | 77.96 $/year | More than 30% lower annual commercial energy cost | |||
| |||||||
Much more l2 cache | 1 MB | vs | 0.5 MB | 2x more l2 cache; more data can be stored in the l2 cache for quick access later | |||
Significantly higher clock speed | 2 GHz | vs | 1.6 GHz | Around 25% higher clock speed | |||
Has virtualization support | Yes | vs | No | Somewhat common; Boosts performance of virtual machines | |||
Much more l2 cache per core | 1 MB/core | vs | 0.5 MB/core | 2x more l2 cache per core | |||
Much better overclocked clock speed (Air) | 2.69 GHz | vs | 2.36 GHz | Around 15% better overclocked clock speed (Air) | |||
Much better overclocked clock speed (Water) | 2.87 GHz | vs | 1.8 GHz | Around 60% better overclocked clock speed (Water) | |||
Newer | May, 2006 | vs | Jul, 2004 | Release date over 1 years later |
Benchmarks Real world tests of Sempron 2800+ vs Athlon 64 3200+
GeekBench 3 (Multi-core) Data courtesy Primate Labs
Sempron 2800+
630
Athlon 64 3200+
696
GeekBench 3 (Single core) Data courtesy Primate Labs
Sempron 2800+
635
Athlon 64 3200+
692
GeekBench 3 (AES single core) Data courtesy Primate Labs
Sempron 2800+
43.2 MB/s
Athlon 64 3200+
52.6 MB/s
GeekBench (32-bit) Data courtesy Primate Labs
Sempron 2800+
682
Athlon 64 3200+
770
GeekBench
Sempron 2800+
1,241
Athlon 64 3200+
1,471
PassMark Data courtesy Passmark
Sempron 2800+
398
Athlon 64 3200+
448
PassMark (Single Core)
Sempron 2800+
487
Athlon 64 3200+
573
Specifications Full list of technical specs
summary | Sempron 2800+ | vs | Athlon 64 3200+ |
---|---|---|---|
Clock speed | 1.6 GHz | 2 GHz | |
Cores | Single core | Single core | |
Socket type | |||
754 | |||
AM2 | |||
462 | |||
features | |||
Has a NX bit | Yes | Yes | |
Has virtualization support | No | Yes | |
Instruction set extensions | |||
SSE2 | |||
MMX | |||
SSE3 | |||
SSE | |||
3DNow! | |||
Supports dynamic frequency scaling | Yes | Yes |
details | Sempron 2800+ | vs | Athlon 64 3200+ |
---|---|---|---|
Threads | 1 | 1 | |
L2 cache | 0.5 MB | 1 MB | |
L2 cache per core | 0.5 MB/core | 1 MB/core | |
Manufacture process | 90 nm | 130 nm | |
Max CPUs | 1 | 1 | |
Operating temperature | Unknown - 70°C | Unknown - 70°C | |
overclocking | |||
Overclock popularity | 1 | 3 | |
Overclock review score | 0 | 0 | |
Overclocked clock speed | 2.36 GHz | 2.69 GHz | |
Overclocked clock speed (Water) | 1.8 GHz | 2.87 GHz | |
PassMark (Overclocked) | 543.6 | 942.2 | |
Overclocked clock speed (Air) | 2.36 GHz | 2.69 GHz | |
power consumption | |||
TDP | 62W | 89W | |
Annual home energy cost | 14.94 $/year | 21.44 $/year | |
Annual commercial energy cost | 54.31 $/year | 77.96 $/year | |
Performance per watt | 0.44 pt/W | 0.34 pt/W | |
Typical power consumption | 50.38W | 72.31W |
AMD Sempron 2800+ ![]() | AMD Athlon 64 3200+ ![]() |
Follow us
Compare
Related Comparisons
![]() | VS | ![]() |
3200+ vs 3000+ | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$69 | ||
3200+ vs 630 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
3200+ vs E6600 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$150 | ||
3200+ vs 2100 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$179 | ||
3200+ vs E8400 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
3200+ vs 4200+ | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$33 | ||
3200+ vs 336 | ||
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 | ![]() |
$248 | $230 | |
4770K vs 9590 | ||