Celeron 2.40 vs Mobile Sempron SI-42

Celeron 2.40 vs Mobile Sempron SI-42 Performance Spectrum

Celeron 2.40

1 / 1

345

+3.9%

332

0.0%

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3955WX

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7955WX

Ryzen Threadripper 3990X

Ryzen Threadripper 7970X

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.

Celeron 2.40 vs Mobile Sempron SI-42 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.

Celeron 2.40 vs Mobile Sempron SI-42: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

Celeron 2.40

2003

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +12.5% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Draws 73W instead of 512W, a 439W reduction.
✅Includes a boxed cooler (Stock Cooler), unlike Mobile Sempron SI-42.

Trade-offs

❌Launch MSRP is still $69 MSRP, while Mobile Sempron SI-42 mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.

Mobile Sempron SI-42

2009

Why buy it

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Celeron 2.40 across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (332 vs 345).
❌601.4% higher power demand at 512W vs 73W.
❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Celeron 2.40.

Quick Answers

So, is Celeron 2.40 better than Mobile Sempron SI-42?

Yes. Celeron 2.40 is the better all-around CPU here. It gives you a 12.5% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data and 3.9% better PassMark, which is enough to make it the stronger overall pick.

Which one is better for gaming?

If gaming is the priority, Celeron 2.40 is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 12.5% more average FPS across 50 shared CPU game tests.

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Celeron 2.40 is the stronger fit. You are getting 3.9% better PassMark, backed by 1 cores and 1 threads.

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

Celeron 2.40 is the better buy right now. Celeron 2.40 comes in at an unclear MSRP at $69 MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it still gives you a 12.5% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. It is also 100.0% better value on MSRP (5.0 vs 0.0 PassMark/$), so you are getting the faster CPU without taking a value hit on paper.

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

Mobile Sempron SI-42 makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2009 vs 2003). That makes it the safer long-term bet.

Celeron 2.40 vs Mobile Sempron SI-42 Technical Specifications

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

Celeron 2.40

The Celeron 2.40 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 2007-01-01. It is based on the NetBurst (2000−2006) architecture. It features 1 cores and 1 threads. Max frequency: 2.4 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 128 kB. Built on 130 nm process technology. Socket: PGA478. Thermal design power (TDP): 73 Watt. Memory support: DDR1, DDR2. Passmark benchmark score: 345 points. Launch price was $69.

Mobile Sempron SI-42

The Mobile Sempron SI-42 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 1 September 2009 (16 years ago). It is based on the Sable (2008−2009) architecture. It features 1 cores and 1 threads. Max frequency: 2.1 GHz. L2 cache: 512 kB. Built on 65 nm process technology. Socket: S1g2. Thermal design power (TDP): 512 kB. Passmark benchmark score: 332 points. Launch price was $69.

⚡

Processing Power

Both the Celeron 2.40 and Mobile Sempron SI-42 share an identical 1-core/1-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 2.4 GHz on the Celeron 2.40 versus 2.1 GHz on the Mobile Sempron SI-42 — a 13.3% clock advantage for the Celeron 2.40. The Celeron 2.40 uses the NetBurst (2000−2006) architecture (130 nm), while the Mobile Sempron SI-42 uses Sable (2008−2009) (65 nm). In PassMark, the Celeron 2.40 scores 345 against the Mobile Sempron SI-42's 332 — a 3.8% lead for the Celeron 2.40.

Feature	Celeron 2.40	Mobile Sempron SI-42
Cores / Threads	1 / 1	1 / 1
Boost Clock	2.4 GHz+14%	2.1 GHz
L3 Cache	0 kB	—
L2 Cache	128 kB	512 kB+300%
Process	130 nm	65 nm-50%
Architecture	NetBurst (2000−2006)	Sable (2008−2009)
PassMark	345+4%	332
Geekbench 6 Single	150	—
Geekbench 6 Multi	150	—

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Celeron 2.40 uses the PGA478 socket (PCIe 1.1), while the Mobile Sempron SI-42 uses S1g2 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.

Feature	Celeron 2.40	Mobile Sempron SI-42
Socket	PGA478	S1g2
PCIe Generation	PCIe 1.1	PCIe 2.0+82%
Max RAM Speed	DDR1-333	—
Max RAM Capacity	2 GB	—
RAM Channels	1	—
ECC Support	No	—
PCIe Lanes	0	—

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization: None (Celeron 2.40) / not specified (Mobile Sempron SI-42). Primary use case: Celeron 2.40 targets Legacy Desktop. Direct competitor: Celeron 2.40 rivals Pentium 4 2.40.