Celeron 925 vs Sempron 3800+

CPU

GPU

Celeron 925

35 WW2011

Similar parts

·······

Buy on Amazon

Sempron 3800+

1 Cores1 Thrd62 WWMax: 2.2 GHz2006

Similar parts

·······

Buy on Amazon

Celeron 925 vs Sempron 3800+ Performance Spectrum

Celeron 925

525

0.0%

528

+0.6%

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 925 vs Sempron 3800+ 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 925 vs Sempron 3800+: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

Celeron 925

2011

Why buy it

✅Draws 35W instead of 62W, a 27W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (525 vs 528).
❌Launch MSRP is still $100 MSRP, while Sempron 3800+ mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.

Sempron 3800+

2006

Why buy it

Trade-offs

❌77.1% higher power demand at 62W vs 35W.

Quick Answers

So, is Sempron 3800+ better than Celeron 925?

Yes. Sempron 3800+ is the better all-around CPU here. It gives you 0.6% better PassMark, which is enough to make it the stronger overall pick.

Which one is better for gaming?

If gaming is the priority, Sempron 3800+ has the edge because it leads the single-thread side of this matchup with 0.6% stronger overall PassMark.

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Sempron 3800+ is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.6% better PassMark, backed by 1 cores and 1 threads.

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

Sempron 3800+ is still the much better call for a fresh build. Sempron 3800+ comes in at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus $100 MSRP, and it still gives you 0.6% higher PassMark. Celeron 925 only looks stronger on raw value math because it is extremely cheap, but that usually means used-market pricing on an obsolete 2011 platform. Even with 100.0% better value on paper (5.3 vs 0.0 PassMark/$), it really only makes sense as a cheap stopgap or a niche existing-platform option for someone already on that older platform.

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

Celeron 925 makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2011 vs 2006). That makes it the safer long-term bet.

Celeron 925 vs Sempron 3800+ Technical Specifications

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

Celeron 925

The Celeron 925 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 2007-01-01. Base frequency: 2.3 GHz. L3 cache: 1 MB L2 Cache. Built on 45 nm process technology. Thermal design power (TDP): 35 Watt. Passmark benchmark score: 525 points. Launch price was $69.

Sempron 3800+

The Sempron 3800+ is manufactured by AMD. It was released in Outubro 2006 (19 years ago). It is based on the Manila (2001−2006) architecture. It features 1 cores and 1 threads. Max frequency: 2.2 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 256 kB. Built on 90 nm process technology. Socket: AM2. Thermal design power (TDP): 62 Watt. Passmark benchmark score: 528 points. Launch price was $21.

⚡

Processing Power

The Sempron 3800+ is built on the Manila (2001−2006) architecture. In PassMark, the Celeron 925 scores 525 against the Sempron 3800+'s 528 — a 0.6% lead for the Sempron 3800+. L3 cache: 1 MB L2 Cache on the Celeron 925 vs 0 kB on the Sempron 3800+.

Feature	Celeron 925	Sempron 3800+
Cores / Threads	—	1 / 1
Boost Clock	—	2.2 GHz
Base Clock	2.3 GHz	—
L3 Cache	1 MB L2 Cache	0 kB
L2 Cache	—	256 kB
Process	45 nm-50%	90 nm
Architecture	—	Manila (2001−2006)
PassMark	525	528

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization: No (Celeron 925) / not specified (Sempron 3800+). Primary use case: Celeron 925 targets Budget. Direct competitor: Celeron 925 rivals Pentium 4 2.80.