Atom E3825 vs Sempron 140

Atom E3825 vs Sempron 140 Performance Spectrum

Atom E3825

2 / 2

525

+2.3%

513

0.0%

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3955WX

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7955WX

Ryzen Threadripper 3990X

About PassMark

PassMark CPU Mark evaluates processor speed through complex mathematical computations. It provides a reliable metric to compare multi-core performance, where higher scores indicate faster processing for multitasking, gaming, and heavy workloads.

Atom E3825 vs Sempron 140 FPS Benchmarks

Predicted gaming performance across popular games. Tested paired with GeForce RTX 5090 to isolate CPU performance.

Search any supported game below to compare 1080p FPS for both components.

Atom E3825 vs Sempron 140: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

See where each CPU makes more sense in practice: gaming, heavier work, platform cost, power draw, and upgrade path.

Atom E3825

2013

Why buy it

✅+2.3% higher PassMark.
✅Draws 6W instead of 45W, a 39W reduction.
✅100+% more PCIe lanes (4 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with Intel HD Graphics (Bay Trail), while Sempron 140 needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Sempron 140.

Sempron 140

2009

Why buy it

✅Includes a boxed cooler (Stock), unlike Atom E3825.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (513 vs 525).
❌650% higher power demand at 45W vs 6W.
❌No integrated graphics, while Atom E3825 can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Quick Answers

So, is Atom E3825 better than Sempron 140?

It depends on what you want from the system. For gaming, Sempron 140 is ahead with 103% higher max boost clock. For rendering, compiling, streaming, and heavier multitasking, Atom E3825 pulls ahead with 2.3% better PassMark.

Which one is better for streaming, content creation, and heavy multitasking?

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Atom E3825 is the stronger fit. You are getting 2.3% better PassMark, backed by 2 cores and 2 threads.

Which one is the smarter buy today, not just the cheaper CPU?

Atom E3825 still makes the most sense overall. Atom E3825 comes in at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it still gives you 2.3% better PassMark.

Which one is more future-proof for 2026 and beyond?

Atom E3825 makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2013 vs 2009) and more multi-core headroom with 2 cores / 2 threads instead of 1/1. That extra compute headroom is more likely to matter as games, background tasks, and creator workloads get heavier.

Atom E3825 vs Sempron 140 Technical Specifications

Side-by-side specs, architecture details, clocks, memory, power, and platform differences.

Atom E3825

The Atom E3825 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 8 October 2013 (12 years ago). It is based on the Bay Trail-I (2013) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Max frequency: 1.33 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 512 kB (per core). Built on 22 nm process technology. Socket: FCBGA1170. Thermal design power (TDP): 6 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 525 points. Launch price was $73.

Sempron 140

The Sempron 140 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 22 July 2009 (16 years ago). It is based on the Sargas (2009−2011) architecture. It features 1 cores and 1 threads. Base frequency is 2.7 GHz, with boost up to 2.7 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 1 MB (per core). Built on 45 nm process technology. Socket: AM3. Thermal design power (TDP): 45 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 513 points. Launch price was $40.

⚡

Processing Power

The Atom E3825 packs 2 cores / 2 threads, while the Sempron 140 offers 1 cores / 1 threads — the Atom E3825 has 1 more core. Boost clocks reach 1.33 GHz on the Atom E3825 versus 2.7 GHz on the Sempron 140 — a 68% clock advantage for the Sempron 140. The Atom E3825 uses the Bay Trail-I (2013) architecture (22 nm), while the Sempron 140 uses Sargas (2009−2011) (45 nm). In PassMark, the Atom E3825 scores 525 against the Sempron 140's 513 — a 2.3% lead for the Atom E3825. Both processors carry 0 kB of L3 cache.

Feature	Atom E3825	Sempron 140
Cores / Threads	2 / 2+100%	1 / 1
Boost Clock	1.33 GHz	2.7 GHz+103%
Base Clock	—	2.7 GHz
L3 Cache	0 kB	0 kB
L2 Cache	512 kB (per core)	1 MB (per core)+100%
Process	22 nm-51%	45 nm
Architecture	Bay Trail-I (2013)	Sargas (2009−2011)
PassMark	525+2%	513
Geekbench 6 Single	—	292

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Atom E3825 uses the FCBGA1170 socket (PCIe 2.0), while the Sempron 140 uses AM3 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Both support up to DDR3L-1066 memory speed. Memory channels: 1 (Atom E3825) vs 2 (Sempron 140). Chipset compatibility: Intel FCBGA1170 (Atom E3825) and AM3,AM2+ (Sempron 140).

Feature	Atom E3825	Sempron 140
Socket	FCBGA1170	AM3
PCIe Generation	PCIe 2.0	PCIe 2.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR3L-1066	DDR3-1066
Max RAM Capacity	8 GB	—
RAM Channels	1	2+100%
ECC Support	Yes	No
PCIe Lanes	4	—

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization: not specified (Atom E3825) / AMD-V (Sempron 140). The Atom E3825 includes integrated graphics (Intel HD Graphics (Bay Trail)), while the Sempron 140 requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Sempron 140 targets Budget. Direct competitor: Sempron 140 rivals Celeron 420.