Apple M2 Max vs Sempron 140
Aggregate performance score
M2 Max outperforms Sempron 140 by a whopping 5190% 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 | 3414 | 539 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Desktop processor | Laptop |
| Series | no data | Apple M-Series |
| Power efficiency | 0.27 | 8.19 |
| Designer | AMD | Apple |
| Architecture codename | Sargas (2009−2011) | no data |
| Release date | 22 July 2009 (16 years ago) | 17 January 2023 (3 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $40 | no data |
Detailed specifications
Basic parameters of Sempron 140 and M2 Max: 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 | 1 (Single-Core) | 12 (Dodeca-Core) |
| Threads | 1 | 12 |
| Base clock speed | 2.7 GHz | 2.424 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 2.7 GHz | 3.7 GHz |
| L1 cache | 128 KB (per core) | 3.3 MB |
| L2 cache | 1 MB (per core) | 36 MB |
| L3 cache | 0 KB | 48 MB |
| Chip lithography | 45 nm | 5 nm |
| Die size | 117 mm2 | no data |
| Number of transistors | 234 million | 67000 Million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | no data |
Compatibility
Information on Sempron 140 and M2 Max 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 | no data |
| Socket | AM3 | no data |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 45 Watt | 79 Watt |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Sempron 140 and M2 Max. 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 | On certain motherboards (Chipset feature) | Apple M2 Max 38-Core GPU |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Sempron 140 and M2 Max.
| PCIe version | 2.0 | no data |
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 | 0.29 | 15.34 |
| Recency | 22 July 2009 | 17 January 2023 |
| Physical cores | 1 | 12 |
| Threads | 1 | 12 |
| Chip lithography | 45 nm | 5 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 45 Watt | 79 Watt |
Sempron 140 has 76% lower power consumption.
Apple M2 Max, on the other hand, has a 5190% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 13 years, 1100% more physical cores and 1100% more threads, and a 800% more advanced lithography process.
The Apple M2 Max is our recommended choice as it beats the AMD Sempron 140 in performance tests.
Note that Sempron 140 is a desktop processor while Apple M2 Max is a notebook one.
Other comparisons
We've compiled a selection of CPU comparisons, ranging from closely matched processors to other comparisons that may be of interest.
