0 Comments
| AMD Sempron X2 198 vs A8 3870K |
Released January, 2012
AMD Sempron X2 198
- 2.5 GHz
- Dual core
Reasons to buy the AMD Sempron X2 198
![]() | Much better performance per watt 1.18 pt/W | ![]() | Much lower annual home energy cost 15.66 $/year |
![]() | Much lower annual commercial energy cost 56.94 $/year |
VS
Released December, 2011
AMD A8 3870K
- 3 GHz
- Quad core
- Unlocked
Reasons to buy the A8 3870K
![]() | Much more l2 cache 4 MB | ![]() | Has a built-in GPU Yes |
![]() | Significantly higher clock speed 3 GHz | ![]() | Much better PassMark score 3,596 |
Cast your vote Do you agree or disagree with CPUBoss?
VS
Differences What are the advantages of each
| |||||||
Much better performance per watt | 1.18 pt/W | vs | 1.03 pt/W | Around 15% better performance per watt | |||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Much lower annual home energy cost | 15.66 $/year | vs | 40.03 $/year | 2.6x lower annual home energy cost | |||
Much lower annual commercial energy cost | 56.94 $/year | vs | 138.41 $/year | 2.4x lower annual commercial energy cost | |||
| |||||||
Much more l2 cache | 4 MB | vs | 1 MB | 4x more l2 cache; more data can be stored in the l2 cache for quick access later | |||
Has a built-in GPU | Yes | vs | No | Somewhat common; A separate graphics adapter is not required | |||
Significantly higher clock speed | 3 GHz | vs | 2.5 GHz | 20% higher clock speed | |||
Much better PassMark score | 3,596 | vs | 1,413 | More than 2.5x better PassMark score | |||
More cores | 4 | vs | 2 | Twice as many cores; run more applications at once | |||
More threads | 4 | vs | 2 | Twice as many threads | |||
Much better overclocked clock speed (Air) | 3.56 GHz | vs | 2.5 GHz | Around 45% better overclocked clock speed (Air) | |||
Much more l2 cache per core | 1 MB/core | vs | 0.5 MB/core | 2x more l2 cache per core | |||
Higher Maximum operating temperature | 72.7 °C | vs | 70.1 °C | Around 5% higher Maximum operating temperature | |||
Much better overclocked clock speed (Water) | 3.67 GHz | vs | 2.5 GHz | More than 45% better overclocked clock speed (Water) |
Benchmarks Real world tests of Sempron X2 198 vs A8 3870K
PassMark Data courtesy Passmark
Sempron X2 198
1,413
A8 3870K
3,596
PassMark (Single Core)
Sempron X2 198
852
A8 3870K
1,032
Specifications Full list of technical specs
summary | Sempron X2 198 | vs | A8 3870K |
---|---|---|---|
Clock speed | 2.5 GHz | 3 GHz | |
Cores | Dual core | Quad core | |
Socket type | |||
FM1 | |||
features | |||
Has a NX bit | Yes | Yes | |
Has virtualization support | Yes | Yes | |
Instruction set extensions | |||
SSE4a | |||
SSE2 | |||
MMX | |||
SSE3 | |||
SSE | |||
AMD64 | |||
AMD-V | |||
3DNow! | |||
Supports dynamic frequency scaling | Yes | Yes | |
power consumption | |||
TDP | 65W | 100W | |
Annual home energy cost | 15.66 $/year | 40.03 $/year | |
Annual commercial energy cost | 56.94 $/year | 138.41 $/year | |
Performance per watt | 1.18 pt/W | 1.03 pt/W | |
Typical power consumption | 52.81W | N/A | |
memory controller | |||
Memory controller | Built-in | Built-in | |
Memory type | |||
DDR3-1866 | |||
DDR3-1600 | |||
DDR3-1333 |
details | Sempron X2 198 | vs | A8 3870K |
---|---|---|---|
Architecture | x86-64 | x86-64 | |
Threads | 2 | 4 | |
L2 cache | 1 MB | 4 MB | |
L2 cache per core | 0.5 MB/core | 1 MB/core | |
Manufacture process | 32 nm | 32 nm | |
Transistor count | 1,178,000,000 | 1,178,000,000 | |
Max CPUs | 1 | 1 | |
Die size | 228 mm² | 228 mm² | |
Voltage range | 0.91 - 1.41V | 0.45 - 1.41V | |
Operating temperature | Unknown - 70.1°C | Unknown - 72.7°C | |
overclocking | |||
Overclocked clock speed | 2.5 GHz | 3.56 GHz | |
Overclocked clock speed (Water) | 2.5 GHz | 3.67 GHz | |
Overclocked clock speed (Air) | 2.5 GHz | 3.56 GHz | |
integrated graphics | |||
GPU | None | GPU | |
Label | N/A | Radeon™ HD 6550D | |
Latest DirectX | N/A | 11.0 | |
Number of displays supported | N/A | 2 | |
GPU clock speed | N/A | 600 MHz | |
Turbo clock speed | N/A | 600 MHz |
AMD Sempron X2 198 ![]() | AMD A8 3870K ![]() |
Follow us
Compare
Related Comparisons
![]() | VS | ![]() |
651K vs 3870K | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$125 | ||
3220 vs 3870K | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
651 vs 3870K | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$205 | ||
2400 vs 3870K | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$100 | ||
3850 vs 3870K | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
3670K vs 3870K | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$100 | ||
6300 vs 3870K | ||
Popular Comparisons
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$300 | $305 | |
2500 vs W3520 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$350 | $272 | |
6700K vs 4790K | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$281 | ||
6410 vs 4200U | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$281 | ||
7th Gen A9-9410 vs 6200U | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$161 | $275 | |
N3540 vs 4005U | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$180 | ||
5200 vs 3470 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$225 | $134 | |
3217U vs 847 | ||