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 Intel Celeron B820

Reasons to consider the
Intel Celeron B820

Report a correction
Much better geekbench 3 AES single core score 84,100 MB/s vs 43.2 MB/s More than 1946.8x better geekbench 3 AES single core score
Much newer manufacturing process 32 nm vs 90 nm A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running processor
Much better geekbench 2 (32-bit) score 2,124 vs 682 More than 3x better geekbench 2 (32-bit) score
More advanced architecture x86-64 vs x86 A 64-bit architecture allows more RAM to be installed and accessed by the processor
Has a built-in GPU Yes vs No Somewhat common; A separate graphics adapter is not required
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
Has virtualization support Yes vs No Somewhat common; Boosts performance of virtual machines
Significantly lower typical power consumption 28.44W vs 50.38W Around 45% lower typical power consumption
Newer Jul, 2012 vs Jul, 2004 Release date over 8 years later
Much higher Maximum operating temperature 100 °C vs 70 °C Around 45% higher Maximum operating temperature
Significantly more l3 cache per core 1 MB/core vs 0 MB/core Compared to all cpus, 1 MB/core l3 cache per core is just OK
Slightly more l3 cache 2 MB vs 0 MB Compared to all cpus, 2 MB l3 cache is just OK
Better performance per watt 2.58 pt/W vs 0.44 pt/W Around 6x better performance per watt
More cores 2 vs 1 Twice as many cores; run more applications at once
Slightly better PassMark score 1,435 vs 398 More than 3.5x better PassMark score
Significantly lower annual home energy cost 8.43 $/year vs 14.94 $/year Around 45% lower annual home energy cost
Significantly lower annual commercial energy cost 30.66 $/year vs 54.31 $/year Around 45% lower annual commercial energy cost
Front view of AMD Sempron 2800+

Reasons to consider the
AMD Sempron 2800+

Report a correction
Better overclocked clock speed (Air) 2.36 GHz vs 1.71 GHz Around 40% better overclocked clock speed (Air)

Benchmarks Real world tests of Celeron B820 vs Sempron 2800+

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

Celeron B820
84,100 MB/s
Sempron 2800+
43.2 MB/s

GeekBench (32-bit) Data courtesy Primate Labs

GeekBench

PassMark Data courtesy Passmark

PassMark (Single Core)

Specifications Full list of technical specs

summary

Celeron B820  vs
Sempron 2800+ 
Clock speed 1.7 GHz 1.6 GHz
Cores Dual core Single core
Socket type
rPGA 988B
754
AM2
462

features

Has a NX bit Yes Yes
Has virtualization support Yes No
Instruction set extensions
SSE2
MMX
SSE4
SSE3
SSE
SSE4.1
SSE4.2
3DNow!
Supplemental SSE3
Supports dynamic frequency scaling Yes Yes

power consumption

TDP 35W 62W
Annual home energy cost 8.43 $/year 14.94 $/year
Annual commercial energy cost 30.66 $/year 54.31 $/year
Performance per watt 2.58 pt/W 0.44 pt/W
Typical power consumption 28.44W 50.38W

details

Celeron B820  vs
Sempron 2800+ 
Architecture x86-64 x86
Threads 2 1
L2 cache 1 MB 0.5 MB
L2 cache per core 0.5 MB/core 0.5 MB/core
L3 cache 2 MB 0 MB
L3 cache per core 1 MB/core 0 MB/core
Manufacture process 32 nm 90 nm
Max CPUs 1 1
Operating temperature Unknown - 100°C Unknown - 70°C

overclocking

Overclocked clock speed 1.71 GHz 2.36 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Water) 1.7 GHz 1.8 GHz
PassMark (Overclocked) 828.3 543.6
Overclocked clock speed (Air) 1.71 GHz 2.36 GHz

integrated graphics

GPU GPU None
Label Intel® HD Graphics N/A
Number of displays supported 2 N/A
GPU clock speed 650 MHz N/A
Turbo clock speed 1,050 MHz N/A
Intel Celeron B820
Report a correction
AMD Sempron 2800+
Report a correction

Comments

comments powered by Disqus