Sempron 2300+ vs Atom E3845
Aggregate performance score
Atom E3845 outperforms Sempron 2300+ by a whopping 415% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing Atom E3845 and Sempron 2300+ processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 2745 | 3342 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Desktop processor |
| Series | Atom | no data |
| Power efficiency | 6.31 | 0.20 |
| Architecture codename | Bay Trail-I (2013) | Barton (2001−2004) |
| Release date | 8 October 2013 (11 years ago) | January 2001 (23 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | no data | $45 |
Detailed specifications
Atom E3845 and Sempron 2300+ 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 | 4 (Quad-Core) | 1 (Single-Core) |
| Threads | 4 | 1 |
| Boost clock speed | 1.91 GHz | 1.58 GHz |
| L1 cache | 64 KB (per core) | 128 KB |
| L2 cache | 512 KB (per core) | 256 KB |
| L3 cache | 0 KB | 0 KB |
| Chip lithography | 22 nm | 130 nm |
| Die size | no data | 101 mm2 |
| Number of transistors | no data | 63 million |
| 64 bit support | + | - |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
Compatibility
Information on Atom E3845 and Sempron 2300+ 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 | 1 | 1 |
| Socket | Intel BGA1170 | A |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 10 Watt | 62 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Atom E3845 and Sempron 2300+. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | + | no data |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Atom E3845 and Sempron 2300+. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR3 | no data |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | Intel HD Graphics | no data |
Synthetic benchmark performance
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. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.
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.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 0.67 | 0.13 |
| Physical cores | 4 | 1 |
| Threads | 4 | 1 |
| Chip lithography | 22 nm | 130 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 10 Watt | 62 Watt |
Atom E3845 has a 415.4% higher aggregate performance score, 300% more physical cores and 300% more threads, a 490.9% more advanced lithography process, and 520% lower power consumption.
The Atom E3845 is our recommended choice as it beats the Sempron 2300+ in performance tests.
Be aware that Atom E3845 is a notebook processor while Sempron 2300+ is a desktop one.
Should you still have questions on choice between Atom E3845 and Sempron 2300+, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
Similar processor comparisons
We picked several similar comparisons of processors in the same market segment and performance relatively close to those reviewed on this page.
