CPUBoss Review Our evaluation of 72 vs 140 among all 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

Sky Diver and Cloud Gate

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?

Sky Diver, Cloud Gate, CompuBench 1.5 Bitcoin mining and 11 more

Value

Are you paying a premium for performance?

Sky Diver, Cloud Gate, CompuBench 1.5 Bitcoin mining and 11 more

5

CPUBoss Score

Combination of all six facets

Winner
AMD Turion X2 72 

CPUBoss recommends the AMD Turion X2 72  based on its performance and power consumption.

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 Turion X2 72

Reasons to consider the
AMD Turion X2 72

Report a correction
Much higher Maximum operating temperature 100 °C vs 63 °C Around 60% higher Maximum operating temperature
Lower typical power consumption 28.44W vs 36.56W More than 20% lower typical power consumption
More cores 2 vs 1 Twice as many cores; run more applications at once
Lower annual home energy cost 8.43 $/year vs 10.84 $/year More than 20% lower annual home energy cost
Lower annual commercial energy cost 30.66 $/year vs 39.42 $/year More than 20% lower annual commercial energy cost
Front view of AMD Sempron 140

Reasons to consider the
AMD Sempron 140

Report a correction
Much newer manufacturing process 45 nm vs 65 nm A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running processor
Higher clock speed 2.7 GHz vs 2.1 GHz Around 30% higher clock speed
Much more l2 cache per core 1 MB/core vs 0.49 MB/core More than 2x more l2 cache per core
Better PassMark (Single core) score 839 vs 610 Around 40% better PassMark (Single core) score

Benchmarks Real world tests of Turion X2 72 vs Sempron 140

GeekBench (32-bit) Data courtesy Primate Labs

GeekBench

PassMark Data courtesy Passmark

PassMark (Single Core)

Specifications Full list of technical specs

summary

Turion X2 72  vs
Sempron 140 
Clock speed 2.1 GHz 2.7 GHz
Cores Dual core Single core
Socket type
S1
AM3
Is unlocked No No

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

bus

Clock speed 400 MHz 2,000 MHz

details

Turion X2 72  vs
Sempron 140 
Architecture x86-64 x86-64
Threads 2 1
L2 cache 0.98 MB 1 MB
L2 cache per core 0.49 MB/core 1 MB/core
Manufacture process 65 nm 45 nm
Max CPUs 1 1
Operating temperature Unknown - 100°C Unknown - 63°C

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

power consumption

TDP 35W 45W
Annual home energy cost 8.43 $/year 10.84 $/year
Annual commercial energy cost 30.66 $/year 39.42 $/year
Performance per watt 1.61 pt/W 1.95 pt/W
Typical power consumption 28.44W 36.56W
AMD Turion X2 72
Report a correction
AMD Sempron 140
Report a correction

Comments

comments powered by Disqus