Winner
Intel Celeron M 430
CPUBoss recommends the Intel Celeron M 430 based on its single-core performance and power consumption.
See full details Intel Celeron M 430 vs AMD Sempron 2800+ |
Released April, 2007
Intel Celeron M 430
- 1.8 GHz
- Single core
4.9 Out of 10
Reasons to buy the Intel Celeron M 430
 | Much better geekbench 3 AES single core score 74,150 MB/s | | Much newer manufacturing process 65 nm |
| | More advanced architecture x86-64 | | More l2 cache 1 MB |
VS
Released July, 2004
AMD Sempron 2800+
- 1.6 GHz
- Single core
4.4 Out of 10
Reasons to buy the AMD Sempron 2800+
| | Supports dynamic frequency scaling Yes | | Higher Maximum operating temperature 70 °C |
CPUBoss Review Our evaluation of 430 vs 2800+ 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 | |
| 4.9 | CPUBoss Score |
Combination of all six facets | |
 | Winner |
Cast your vote Do you agree or disagree with CPUBoss?
VS
Intel Celeron M 430CPUBoss Winner |  | |
Differences What are the advantages of each
| |||||||
| Much better geekbench 3 AES single core score | 74,150 MB/s | vs | 43.2 MB/s | Around 1716.5x better geekbench 3 AES single core score | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Much newer manufacturing process | 65 nm | vs | 90 nm | A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running processor | |||
| More advanced architecture | x86-64 | vs | x86 | A 64-bit architecture allows more RAM to be installed and accessed by the processor | |||
| 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 | |||
| Higher clock speed | 1.8 GHz | vs | 1.6 GHz | More than 10% higher clock speed | |||
| Significantly lower typical power consumption | 28.44W | vs | 50.38W | Around 45% lower typical power consumption | |||
| Much more l2 cache per core | 1 MB/core | vs | 0.5 MB/core | 2x more l2 cache per core | |||
| Significantly better overclocked clock speed (Air) | 3.43 GHz | vs | 2.36 GHz | More than 45% better overclocked clock speed (Air) | |||
| Newer | Apr, 2007 | vs | Jul, 2004 | Release date over 2 years later | |||
| Much better overclocked clock speed (Water) | 3.67 GHz | vs | 1.8 GHz | More than 2x better overclocked clock speed (Water) | |||
| Better performance per watt | 1.73 pt/W | vs | 0.44 pt/W | Around 4x better performance per watt | |||
| 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 | |||
| |||||||
| Supports dynamic frequency scaling | Yes | vs | No | Somewhat common; Allows for maximum performance when needed, while conserving power and minimizing heat production when not needed | |||
| Higher Maximum operating temperature | 70 °C | vs | 60.4 °C | More than 15% higher Maximum operating temperature | |||
Report a correction
Benchmarks Real world tests of Celeron M 430 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
GeekBench (32-bit) Data courtesy Primate Labs
GeekBench
PassMark Data courtesy Passmark
PassMark (Single Core)
Specifications Full list of technical specs
summary | Celeron M 430 | vs | Sempron 2800+ |
|---|---|---|---|
| Clock speed | 1.8 GHz | 1.6 GHz | |
| Cores | Single core | Single core | |
| Socket type | |||
| 462 | |||
| 754 | |||
| AM2 | |||
| 478 | |||
| LGA 775 | |||
features | |||
| Has a NX bit | Yes | Yes | |
| Has virtualization support | No | No | |
| Instruction set extensions | |||
| SSE2 | |||
| MMX | |||
| SSE3 | |||
| SSE | |||
| 3DNow! | |||
| Supports dynamic frequency scaling | No | 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 | 1.73 pt/W | 0.44 pt/W | |
| Typical power consumption | 28.44W | 50.38W | |
bus | |||
| Clock speed | 800 MHz | 200 MHz | |
details | Celeron M 430 | vs | Sempron 2800+ |
|---|---|---|---|
| Architecture | x86-64 | x86 | |
| Threads | 1 | 1 | |
| L2 cache | 1 MB | 0.5 MB | |
| L2 cache per core | 1 MB/core | 0.5 MB/core | |
| Manufacture process | 65 nm | 90 nm | |
| Max CPUs | 1 | 1 | |
| Operating temperature | Unknown - 60.4°C | Unknown - 70°C | |
overclocking | |||
| Overclock popularity | 1 | 1 | |
| Overclocked clock speed | 3.43 GHz | 2.36 GHz | |
| Overclocked clock speed (Water) | 3.67 GHz | 1.8 GHz | |
| PassMark (Overclocked) | 1,406.9 | 543.6 | |
| Overclocked clock speed (Air) | 3.43 GHz | 2.36 GHz | |
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 | |
 Intel Celeron M 430  Report a correction |  AMD Sempron 2800+ Report a correction |
Follow us
Compare
Related Comparisons
 | VS |  |
| $69 | $37 | |
| 630 vs 430 | ||
 | VS | |
| $37 | ||
| 5200+ vs 430 | ||
 | VS | |
| $125 | $37 | |
| E7500 vs 430 | ||
 | VS | |
| $37 | ||
| 541 vs 430 | ||
 | VS | |
| $37 | ||
| 3200+ vs 430 | ||
 | VS | |
| $37 | ||
| E2180 vs 430 | ||
| | VS |  |
| $69 | ||
| 630 vs 2800+ | ||
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 |  |
| $225 | $134 | |
| 3217U vs 847 | ||
 | VS |  |
| $180 | ||
| 5200 vs 3470 | ||
