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 3000+

Reasons to consider the
AMD Sempron 3000+

Report a correction
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
Front view of AMD Athlon 64 3000+

Reasons to consider the
AMD Athlon 64 3000+

Report a correction
Much more l2 cache 1 MB vs 0.13 MB 8x more l2 cache; more data can be stored in the l2 cache for quick access later
Much more l2 cache per core 1 MB/core vs 0.13 MB/core 8x more l2 cache per core
Has a NX bit Yes vs No Somewhat common; Prevents a common class of security exploits

Features Key features of the Sempron 3000+  vs Athlon 64 3000+ 

L2 cache

Specifications Full list of technical specs

summary

Sempron 3000+  vs
Athlon 64 3000+ 
Cores Single core Single core
Socket type
754

features

Has a NX bit No Yes
Instruction set extensions
MMX
3DNow!
SSE
SSE2

details

Sempron 3000+  vs
Athlon 64 3000+ 
Threads 1 1
L2 cache 0.13 MB 1 MB
L2 cache per core 0.13 MB/core 1 MB/core
Manufacture process 90 nm 130 nm
Max CPUs 1 1
Operating temperature Unknown - 70°C Unknown - 70°C

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
Typical power consumption 50.38W 72.31W
AMD Sempron 3000+
Report a correction
AMD Athlon 64 3000+
Report a correction

Comments

comments powered by Disqus