Celeron J1750 vs Sempron 140

Celeron J1750 vs Sempron 140 Performance Spectrum

Celeron J1750

2 / 2

505

0.0%

513

+1.6%

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 J1750 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 J1750 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 J1750

2013

Why buy it

✅Draws 1W instead of 45W, a 44W reduction.
✅100+% more PCIe lanes (4 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with HD Graphics (Bay Trail), while Sempron 140 needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌Lower Geekbench single-core performance for gaming (150 vs 292).
❌Lower PassMark (505 vs 513).
❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Sempron 140.

Sempron 140

2009

Why buy it

✅+94.7% higher Geekbench single-core performance for gaming and desktop responsiveness.
✅Includes a boxed cooler (Stock), unlike Celeron J1750.

Trade-offs

❌4400% higher power demand at 45W vs 1W.
❌No integrated graphics, while Celeron J1750 can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Quick Answers

So, is Sempron 140 better than Celeron J1750?

Yes. Sempron 140 is the better all-around CPU here. It gives you a 1.4% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data and 1.6% better PassMark, which is enough to make it the stronger overall pick.

Which one is better for gaming?

If gaming is the priority, Sempron 140 is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 1.4% 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, Sempron 140 is the stronger fit. You are getting 1.6% better PassMark, backed by 1 cores and 1 threads.

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

Sempron 140 still makes the most sense overall. Sempron 140 comes in at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it still gives you a 1.4% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data.

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

Celeron J1750 makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2013 vs 2009). That makes it the safer long-term bet.

Celeron J1750 vs Sempron 140 Technical Specifications

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

Celeron J1750

The Celeron J1750 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 1 September 2013 (12 years ago). It is based on the Bay Trail-D (2013) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 2.41 GHz, with boost up to 2.41 GHz. L3 cache: 1 MB L2 Cache. L2 cache: 1 MB. Built on 22 nm process technology. Socket: FCBGA1170. Thermal design power (TDP): 10 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 505 points. Launch price was $72.

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 J1750 packs 2 cores / 2 threads, while the Sempron 140 offers 1 cores / 1 threads — the Celeron J1750 has 1 more core. Boost clocks reach 2.41 GHz on the Celeron J1750 versus 2.7 GHz on the Sempron 140 — a 11.4% clock advantage for the Sempron 140 (base: 2.41 GHz vs 2.7 GHz). The Celeron J1750 uses the Bay Trail-D (2013) architecture (22 nm), while the Sempron 140 uses Sargas (2009−2011) (45 nm). In PassMark, the Celeron J1750 scores 505 against the Sempron 140's 513 — a 1.6% lead for the Sempron 140. Geekbench 6 single-core — the metric most relevant to gaming — records 150 vs 292, a 64.3% lead for the Sempron 140 that directly translates to higher frame rates. L3 cache: 1 MB L2 Cache on the Celeron J1750 vs 0 kB on the Sempron 140.

Feature	Celeron J1750	Sempron 140
Cores / Threads	2 / 2+100%	1 / 1
Boost Clock	2.41 GHz	2.7 GHz+12%
Base Clock	2.41 GHz	2.7 GHz+12%
L3 Cache	1 MB L2 Cache	0 kB
L2 Cache	1 MB	1 MB (per core)
Process	22 nm-51%	45 nm
Architecture	Bay Trail-D (2013)	Sargas (2009−2011)
PassMark	505	513+2%
Geekbench 6 Single	150	292+95%
Geekbench 6 Multi	250	—

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Celeron J1750 uses the FCBGA1170 socket (PCIe 2.0), while the Sempron 140 uses AM3 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR3L-1333 on the Celeron J1750 versus DDR3-1066 on the Sempron 140 — the Celeron J1750 supports 25% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. Chipset compatibility: N/A (SoC) (Celeron J1750) and AM3,AM2+ (Sempron 140).

Feature	Celeron J1750	Sempron 140
Socket	FCBGA1170	AM3
PCIe Generation	PCIe 2.0	PCIe 2.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR3L-1333+25%	DDR3-1066
Max RAM Capacity	8 GB	—
RAM Channels	2	2
ECC Support	No	No
PCIe Lanes	4	—

🔧

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 J1750) vs AMD-V (Sempron 140). The Celeron J1750 includes integrated graphics (HD Graphics (Bay Trail)), while the Sempron 140 requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Celeron J1750 targets Low Power, Sempron 140 targets Budget. Direct competitor: Celeron J1750 rivals Pentium J2850; Sempron 140 rivals Celeron 420.