Opteron 148 vs Sempron 140

VS

Primary details

Comparing Sempron 140 and Opteron 148 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the rankingnot ratednot rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentDesktop processorServer
Architecture codenameSargas (2009−2011)SledgeHammer (2003−2005)
Release date22 July 2009 (15 years ago)2 August 2005 (19 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$40no data

Detailed specifications

Sempron 140 and Opteron 148 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 cores1 (Single-Core)1 (Single-Core)
Threads11
Base clock speed2.7 GHz2.2 GHz
Boost clock speed2.7 GHz2.2 GHz
L1 cache128 KB (per core)128 KB
L2 cache1 MB (per core)1 MB
L3 cache0 KB0 KB
Chip lithography45 nm130 nm
Die size117 mm2115 mm2
Number of transistors234 million114 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--

Compatibility

Information on Sempron 140 and Opteron 148 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 configuration11
SocketAM3939
Power consumption (TDP)45 Watt85 Watt

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Sempron 140 and Opteron 148. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3DDR1

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardOn certain motherboards (Chipset feature)On certain motherboards (Chipset feature)

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Sempron 140 and Opteron 148.

PCIe version2.0no 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.



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.

Sempron 140 486
+24%
Opteron 148 392

Pros & cons summary


Recency 22 July 2009 2 August 2005
Chip lithography 45 nm 130 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 45 Watt 85 Watt

Sempron 140 has an age advantage of 3 years, a 188.9% more advanced lithography process, and 88.9% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between Sempron 140 and Opteron 148. We've got no test results to judge.

Note that Sempron 140 is a desktop processor while Opteron 148 is a server/workstation one.


Should you still have questions on choice between Sempron 140 and Opteron 148, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite CPU.


AMD Sempron 140
Sempron 140
AMD Opteron 148
Opteron 148

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.

Community ratings

Here you can see how users rate the processors, as well as rate them yourself.


3.1 232 votes

Rate Sempron 140 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

No user ratings yet.

Rate Opteron 148 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Sempron 140 or Opteron 148, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.