Sempron 140 vs Phenom II X6 1065T
Aggregate performance score
Phenom II X6 1065T outperforms Sempron 140 by a whopping 587% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing Phenom II X6 1065T and Sempron 140 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 1857 | 3094 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Desktop processor | Desktop processor |
| Power efficiency | 1.61 | 0.65 |
| Architecture codename | Thuban (2010) | Sargas (2009−2011) |
| Release date | 7 December 2010 (13 years ago) | 22 July 2009 (15 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | no data | $40 |
Detailed specifications
Phenom II X6 1065T 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 | 6 (Hexa-Core) | 1 (Single-Core) |
| Threads | 6 | 1 |
| Base clock speed | 2.9 GHz | 2.7 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 3.4 GHz | 2.7 GHz |
| L1 cache | 128 KB (per core) | 128 KB (per core) |
| L2 cache | 512 KB (per core) | 1 MB (per core) |
| L3 cache | 6 MB (shared) | 0 KB |
| Chip lithography | 45 nm | 45 nm |
| Die size | 346 mm2 | 117 mm2 |
| Number of transistors | 904 million | 234 million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
Compatibility
Information on Phenom II X6 1065T 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 | 1 | 1 |
| Socket | AM3 | AM3 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 125 Watt | 45 Watt |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Phenom II X6 1065T and Sempron 140. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR3 | DDR3 |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | no data | On certain motherboards (Chipset feature) |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Phenom II X6 1065T and Sempron 140.
| PCIe version | 2.0 | 2.0 |
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 | 2.13 | 0.31 |
| Recency | 7 December 2010 | 22 July 2009 |
| Physical cores | 6 | 1 |
| Threads | 6 | 1 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 125 Watt | 45 Watt |
Phenom II X6 1065T has a 587.1% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 1 year, and 500% more physical cores and 500% more threads.
Sempron 140, on the other hand, has 177.8% lower power consumption.
The Phenom II X6 1065T is our recommended choice as it beats the Sempron 140 in performance tests.
Should you still have questions on choice between Phenom II X6 1065T and Sempron 140, 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.
