Celeron E3300 vs Sempron 3850

Celeron E3300 vs Sempron 3850 Performance Spectrum

Celeron E3300

2 / 2

1,155

0.0%

1,168

+1.1%

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 E3300 vs Sempron 3850 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 E3300 vs Sempron 3850: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

Celeron E3300

2009

Why buy it

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (1,155 vs 1,168).
❌Launch MSRP is still $50 MSRP, while Sempron 3850 mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
❌160% higher power demand at 65W vs 25W.

Sempron 3850

2014

Why buy it

✅+1.1% higher PassMark.
✅Draws 25W instead of 65W, a 40W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Fewer obvious downsides in this matchup outside of normal market pricing swings.

Quick Answers

So, is Sempron 3850 better than Celeron E3300?

It depends on what you want from the system. For gaming, Celeron E3300 is ahead with a 0.2% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. For rendering, compiling, streaming, and heavier multitasking, Sempron 3850 pulls ahead with 1.1% better PassMark.

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Sempron 3850 is the stronger fit. You are getting 1.1% better PassMark, backed by 4 cores and 4 threads.

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

Sempron 3850 is still the much better call for a fresh build. Sempron 3850 comes in at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus $50 MSRP, and it still gives you 1.1% better PassMark. Celeron E3300 only looks stronger on raw value math because it is extremely cheap, but that usually means used-market pricing on an obsolete 2009 platform. Even with 100.0% better value on paper (23.1 vs 0.0 PassMark/$), it really only makes sense as a cheap stopgap or a niche existing-platform option for someone already on LGA775.

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

Sempron 3850 makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2014 vs 2009) and more multi-core headroom with 4 cores / 4 threads instead of 2/2. That extra compute headroom is more likely to matter as games, background tasks, and creator workloads get heavier.

Celeron E3300 vs Sempron 3850 Technical Specifications

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

Celeron E3300

The Celeron E3300 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 30 August 2009 (16 years ago). It is based on the Wolfdale (2008−2010) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 2.5 GHz, with boost up to 2.5 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 1 MB (total). Built on 45 nm process technology. Socket: LGA775. Thermal design power (TDP): 65 Watt. Memory support: DDR1, DDR2, DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 1,155 points. Launch price was $70.

Sempron 3850

The Sempron 3850 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 2007-01-01. It is based on the Kabini (2013−2014) architecture. It features 4 cores and 4 threads. Max frequency: 1.3 GHz. L2 cache: 2048 kB. Built on 28 nm process technology. Socket: AM1. Thermal design power (TDP): 25 Watt. Memory support: DDR3-1600. Passmark benchmark score: 1,168 points. Launch price was $69.

⚡

Processing Power

The Celeron E3300 packs 2 cores / 2 threads, while the Sempron 3850 offers 4 cores / 4 threads — the Sempron 3850 has 2 more cores. Boost clocks reach 2.5 GHz on the Celeron E3300 versus 1.3 GHz on the Sempron 3850 — a 63.2% clock advantage for the Celeron E3300. The Celeron E3300 uses the Wolfdale (2008−2010) architecture (45 nm), while the Sempron 3850 uses Kabini (2013−2014) (28 nm). In PassMark, the Celeron E3300 scores 1,155 against the Sempron 3850's 1,168 — a 1.1% lead for the Sempron 3850.

Feature	Celeron E3300	Sempron 3850
Cores / Threads	2 / 2	4 / 4+100%
Boost Clock	2.5 GHz+92%	1.3 GHz
Base Clock	2.5 GHz	—
L3 Cache	0 kB	—
L2 Cache	1 MB (total)	2048 kB+100%
Process	45 nm	28 nm-38%
Architecture	Wolfdale (2008−2010)	Kabini (2013−2014)
PassMark	1,155	1,168+1%
Geekbench 6 Single	347	—
Geekbench 6 Multi	624	—

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Celeron E3300 uses the LGA775 socket (PCIe 1.1), while the Sempron 3850 uses AM1 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.

Feature	Celeron E3300	Sempron 3850
Socket	LGA775	AM1
PCIe Generation	PCIe 1.1	PCIe 2.0+82%
Max RAM Speed	DDR3-1066	—
Max RAM Capacity	8 GB	—
RAM Channels	2	—
ECC Support	No	—
PCIe Lanes	0	—

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization: VT-x (Celeron E3300) / not specified (Sempron 3850). Primary use case: Celeron E3300 targets Budget. Direct competitor: Celeron E3300 rivals Pentium E5200.