Celeron J1750 vs Sempron 3800+

Celeron J1750 vs Sempron 3800+ Performance Spectrum

Celeron J1750

2 / 2

505

0.0%

528

+4.6%

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 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 J1750 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 J1750

2013

Why buy it

✅Draws 1W instead of 62W, a 61W reduction.
✅100+% more PCIe lanes (4 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with HD Graphics (Bay Trail), while Sempron 3800+ needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (505 vs 528).

Sempron 3800+

2006

Why buy it

✅+4.6% higher PassMark.

Trade-offs

❌6100% higher power demand at 62W vs 1W.
❌No integrated graphics, while Celeron J1750 can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Quick Answers

So, is Celeron J1750 better than Sempron 3800+?

It depends on what you want from the system. For gaming, Celeron J1750 is ahead with a 1.4% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. For rendering, compiling, streaming, and heavier multitasking, Sempron 3800+ pulls ahead with 4.6% better 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 4.6% better PassMark, backed by 1 cores and 1 threads.

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

Celeron J1750 still makes the most sense overall. Celeron J1750 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 2006). That makes it the safer long-term bet.

Celeron J1750 vs Sempron 3800+ 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 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 Celeron J1750 packs 2 cores / 2 threads, while the Sempron 3800+ offers 1 cores / 1 threads — the Celeron J1750 has 1 more core. Boost clocks reach 2.41 GHz on the Celeron J1750 versus 2.2 GHz on the Sempron 3800+ — a 9.1% clock advantage for the Celeron J1750. The Celeron J1750 uses the Bay Trail-D (2013) architecture (22 nm), while the Sempron 3800+ uses Manila (2001−2006) (90 nm). In PassMark, the Celeron J1750 scores 505 against the Sempron 3800+'s 528 — a 4.5% lead for the Sempron 3800+. L3 cache: 1 MB L2 Cache on the Celeron J1750 vs 0 kB on the Sempron 3800+.

Feature	Celeron J1750	Sempron 3800+
Cores / Threads	2 / 2+100%	1 / 1
Boost Clock	2.41 GHz+10%	2.2 GHz
Base Clock	2.41 GHz	—
L3 Cache	1 MB L2 Cache	0 kB
L2 Cache	1 MB+300%	256 kB
Process	22 nm-76%	90 nm
Architecture	Bay Trail-D (2013)	Manila (2001−2006)
PassMark	505	528+5%
Geekbench 6 Single	150	—
Geekbench 6 Multi	250	—

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Celeron J1750 uses the FCBGA1170 socket (PCIe 2.0), while the Sempron 3800+ uses AM2 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.

Feature	Celeron J1750	Sempron 3800+
Socket	FCBGA1170	AM2
PCIe Generation	PCIe 2.0	PCIe 2.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR3L-1333	—
Max RAM Capacity	8 GB	—
RAM Channels	2	—
ECC Support	No	—
PCIe Lanes	4	—

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization: VT-x (Celeron J1750) / not specified (Sempron 3800+). The Celeron J1750 includes integrated graphics (HD Graphics (Bay Trail)), while the Sempron 3800+ requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Celeron J1750 targets Low Power. Direct competitor: Celeron J1750 rivals Pentium J2850.