Celeron N2808 vs Sempron 150

Celeron N2808 vs Sempron 150 Performance Spectrum

Celeron N2808

2 / 2

615

+6.2%

579

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 N2808 vs Sempron 150 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 N2808 vs Sempron 150: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

Celeron N2808

2014

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +7.1% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Draws 4W instead of 45W, a 41W reduction.
✅100+% more PCIe lanes (4 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with HD Graphics (Bay Trail), while Sempron 150 needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

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

Sempron 150

2010

Why buy it

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Celeron N2808 across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (579 vs 615).
❌1025% higher power demand at 45W vs 4W.
❌No integrated graphics, while Celeron N2808 can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Quick Answers

So, is Celeron N2808 better than Sempron 150?

Yes. Celeron N2808 is the better all-around CPU here. It gives you a 7.1% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data, 6.2% better PassMark, and the stronger long-term platform, which is enough to make it the stronger overall pick.

Which one is better for gaming?

If gaming is the priority, Celeron N2808 is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 7.1% 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, Celeron N2808 is the stronger fit. You are getting 6.2% better PassMark, backed by 2 cores and 2 threads.

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

Celeron N2808 still makes the most sense overall. Celeron N2808 comes in at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it still gives you a 7.1% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data.

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

Celeron N2808 makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2014 vs 2010) and more multi-core headroom with 2 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 N2808 vs Sempron 150 Technical Specifications

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

Celeron N2808

The Celeron N2808 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 2007-01-01. It is based on the Bay Trail-M (2013−2014) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 1.58 GHz, with boost up to 2.25 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 512K (per core). Built on 22 nm process technology. Socket: FCBGA1170. Thermal design power (TDP): 4.5 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 615 points. Launch price was $69.

Sempron 150

The Sempron 150 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 7 December 2010 (14 years ago). It is based on the Sargas (2009−2011) architecture. It features 1 cores and 1 threads. Base frequency is 2.9 GHz, with boost up to 2.9 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: 579 points. Launch price was $73.

⚡

Processing Power

The Celeron N2808 packs 2 cores / 2 threads, while the Sempron 150 offers 1 cores / 1 threads — the Celeron N2808 has 1 more core. Boost clocks reach 2.25 GHz on the Celeron N2808 versus 2.9 GHz on the Sempron 150 — a 25.2% clock advantage for the Sempron 150 (base: 1.58 GHz vs 2.9 GHz). The Celeron N2808 uses the Bay Trail-M (2013−2014) architecture (22 nm), while the Sempron 150 uses Sargas (2009−2011) (45 nm). In PassMark, the Celeron N2808 scores 615 against the Sempron 150's 579 — a 6% lead for the Celeron N2808. Both processors carry 0 kB of L3 cache.

Feature	Celeron N2808	Sempron 150
Cores / Threads	2 / 2+100%	1 / 1
Boost Clock	2.25 GHz	2.9 GHz+29%
Base Clock	1.58 GHz	2.9 GHz+84%
L3 Cache	0 kB	0 kB
L2 Cache	512K (per core)+51100%	1 MB (per core)
Process	22 nm-51%	45 nm
Architecture	Bay Trail-M (2013−2014)	Sargas (2009−2011)
PassMark	615+6%	579

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Celeron N2808 uses the FCBGA1170 socket (PCIe 2.0), while the Sempron 150 uses AM3 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.

Feature	Celeron N2808	Sempron 150
Socket	FCBGA1170	AM3
PCIe Generation	PCIe 2.0	PCIe 2.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR3L-1333	—
Max RAM Capacity	4 GB	—
RAM Channels	1	—
ECC Support	No	—
PCIe Lanes	4	—

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization: VT-x (Celeron N2808) / not specified (Sempron 150). The Celeron N2808 includes integrated graphics (HD Graphics (Bay Trail)), while the Sempron 150 requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Celeron N2808 targets Mobile.