Celeron 807 vs Sempron 140

Celeron 807 vs Sempron 140 Performance Spectrum

Celeron 807

1 / 2

535

+4.3%

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.

Celeron 807 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.

Celeron 807 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.

Celeron 807

2012

Why buy it

✅+4.3% higher PassMark.
✅Draws 17W instead of 45W, a 28W reduction.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with HD Graphics (Sandy Bridge), while Sempron 140 needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌Launch MSRP is still $70 MSRP, while Sempron 140 mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Sempron 140.

Sempron 140

2009

Why buy it

✅Includes a boxed cooler (Stock), unlike Celeron 807.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (513 vs 535).
❌164.7% higher power demand at 45W vs 17W.
❌No integrated graphics, while Celeron 807 can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Quick Answers

So, is Celeron 807 better than Sempron 140?

It depends on what you want from the system. For gaming, Sempron 140 is ahead with a 1.1% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. For rendering, compiling, streaming, and heavier multitasking, Celeron 807 pulls ahead with 4.3% better PassMark.

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Celeron 807 is the stronger fit. You are getting 4.3% better PassMark, backed by 1 cores and 2 threads.

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

Celeron 807 is the better buy right now. Celeron 807 comes in at an unclear MSRP at $70 MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it still gives you 4.3% better PassMark. The compromise is that Sempron 140 is still the better pure gaming CPU with a 1.1% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. It is also 100.0% better value on MSRP (7.6 vs 0.0 PassMark/$), so you are getting the faster CPU without taking a value hit on paper.

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

Celeron 807 makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2012 vs 2009) and more multi-core headroom with 1 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.

Celeron 807 vs Sempron 140 Technical Specifications

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

Celeron 807

The Celeron 807 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 1 July 2012 (13 years ago). It is based on the Sandy Bridge (2011−2013) architecture. It features 1 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 1.5 GHz, with boost up to 1.5 GHz. L3 cache: 1.5 MB (total). L2 cache: 256K (per core). Built on 32 nm process technology. Socket: BGA1023. Thermal design power (TDP): 17 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 535 points. Launch price was $70.

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 Celeron 807 packs 1 cores / 2 threads, matching the Sempron 140's 1 cores. Boost clocks reach 1.5 GHz on the Celeron 807 versus 2.7 GHz on the Sempron 140 — a 57.1% clock advantage for the Sempron 140 (base: 1.5 GHz vs 2.7 GHz). The Celeron 807 uses the Sandy Bridge (2011−2013) architecture (32 nm), while the Sempron 140 uses Sargas (2009−2011) (45 nm). In PassMark, the Celeron 807 scores 535 against the Sempron 140's 513 — a 4.2% lead for the Celeron 807. L3 cache: 1.5 MB (total) on the Celeron 807 vs 0 kB on the Sempron 140.

Feature	Celeron 807	Sempron 140
Cores / Threads	1 / 2	1 / 1
Boost Clock	1.5 GHz	2.7 GHz+80%
Base Clock	1.5 GHz	2.7 GHz+80%
L3 Cache	1.5 MB (total)	0 kB
L2 Cache	256K (per core)+25500%	1 MB (per core)
Process	32 nm-29%	45 nm
Architecture	Sandy Bridge (2011−2013)	Sargas (2009−2011)
PassMark	535+4%	513
Geekbench 6 Single	—	292

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Celeron 807 uses the BGA1023 socket (PCIe 2.0), while the Sempron 140 uses AM3 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR3-1333 on the Celeron 807 versus DDR3-1066 on the Sempron 140 — the Celeron 807 supports 25% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. Chipset compatibility: QM67,QS67,HM67,HM65 (Celeron 807) and AM3,AM2+ (Sempron 140).

Feature	Celeron 807	Sempron 140
Socket	BGA1023	AM3
PCIe Generation	PCIe 2.0	PCIe 2.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR3-1333+25%	DDR3-1066
Max RAM Capacity	16 GB	—
RAM Channels	2	2
ECC Support	No	No
PCIe Lanes	0	—

🔧

Advanced Features

Only the Sempron 140 has an unlocked multiplier for overclocking — a significant advantage for enthusiasts seeking extra performance. Virtualization support: VT-x (Celeron 807) vs AMD-V (Sempron 140). The Celeron 807 includes integrated graphics (HD Graphics (Sandy Bridge)), while the Sempron 140 requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Celeron 807 targets Mobile, Sempron 140 targets Budget. Direct competitor: Sempron 140 rivals Celeron 420.