Sempron 140 vs Apple M3 Max 16-Core
Aggregate performance score
M3 Max 16-Core outperforms Sempron 140 by a whopping 7969% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Contents
Primary details
Comparing processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 275 | 3379 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Desktop processor |
| Series | Apple M3 | no data |
| Power efficiency | no data | 0.69 |
| Designer | Apple | AMD |
| Architecture codename | no data | Sargas (2009−2011) |
| Release date | 30 October 2023 (2 years ago) | 22 July 2009 (16 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | no data | $40 |
Detailed specifications
M3 Max 16-Core and Sempron 140 basic parameters such as number of cores, number of threads, base frequency and turbo boost clock, lithography, cache size and multiplier lock state. These parameters indirectly say of CPU speed, though for more precise assessment you have to consider their test results.
| Physical cores | 16 (Hexadeca-Core) | 1 (Single-Core) |
| Threads | 16 | 1 |
| Base clock speed | 2.748 GHz | 2.7 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 4.06 GHz | 2.7 GHz |
| L1 cache | no data | 128 KB (per core) |
| L2 cache | no data | 1 MB (per core) |
| L3 cache | no data | 0 KB |
| Chip lithography | 3 nm | 45 nm |
| Die size | no data | 117 mm2 |
| Number of transistors | 92000 Million | 234 million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | no data | - |
Compatibility
Information on M3 Max 16-Core and Sempron 140 compatibility with other computer components: motherboard (look for socket type), power supply unit (look for power consumption) etc. Useful when planning a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. Note that power consumption of some processors can well exceed their nominal TDP, even without overclocking. Some can even double their declared thermals given that the motherboard allows to tune the CPU power parameters.
| Number of CPUs in a configuration | no data | 1 |
| Socket | no data | AM3 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | no data | 45 Watt |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by M3 Max 16-Core and Sempron 140. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | no data | DDR3 |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | Apple M3 Max 40-Core GPU | On certain motherboards (Chipset feature) |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by M3 Max 16-Core and Sempron 140.
| PCIe version | no data | 2.0 |
Synthetic benchmarks
Various benchmark results of the processors in comparison. Overall score is measured in points in 0-100 range, higher is better.
Combined synthetic benchmark score
This is our combined benchmark performance rating.
Passmark
Passmark CPU Mark is a widespread benchmark, consisting of 8 different types of workload, including integer and floating point math, extended instructions, compression, encryption and physics calculation. There is also one separate single-threaded scenario measuring single-core performance. Other than that, Passmark measures multi-core performance.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 23.40 | 0.29 |
| Recency | 30 October 2023 | 22 July 2009 |
| Physical cores | 16 | 1 |
| Threads | 16 | 1 |
| Chip lithography | 3 nm | 45 nm |
Apple M3 Max 16-Core has a 7969% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 14 years, 1500% more physical cores and 1500% more threads, and a 1400% more advanced lithography process.
The Apple M3 Max 16-Core is our recommended choice as it beats the AMD Sempron 140 in performance tests.
Be aware that Apple M3 Max 16-Core is a notebook processor while Sempron 140 is a desktop one.
Other comparisons
We've compiled a selection of CPU comparisons, ranging from closely matched processors to other comparisons that may be of interest.
