Select any two CPUs for comparison
VS

Gaming Performance Comparison

Recommended System Requirements
Game Celeron D 355 Sempron 64 LE-1100
Cyberpunk 2077 2637% 1937%
Assassins Creed: Valhalla 3585% 2643%
Call of Duty: Black Ops Cold War 2552% 1874%
FIFA 21 2460% 1805%
Microsoft Flight Simulator 3000% 2208%
World of Warcraft: Shadowlands 4155% 3067%
Watch Dogs Legion 3585% 2643%
Horizon: Zero Dawn 3000% 2208%
Grand Theft Auto VI 4398% 3248%
Genshin Impact 1972% 1443%

In terms of overall gaming performance, the AMD Sempron 64 LE-1100 is marginally better than the Intel Celeron D 355 when it comes to running the latest games. This also means it will be less likely to bottleneck more powerful GPUs, allowing them to achieve more of their gaming performance potential.

The Sempron 64 LE-1100 was released less than a year after the Celeron D 355, and so they are likely to have similar levels of support, and similarly optimized performance when running the latest games.

Both CPUs exhibit very poor performance, so rather than upgrading from one to the other you should consider looking at more powerful CPUs. Neither of these will be able to run the latest games in any playable way.

The Celeron D 355 and the Sempron 64 LE-1100 both have 1 cores, and so are quite likely to struggle with the latest games, or at least bottleneck high-end graphics cards when running them. With a decent accompanying GPU, the Celeron D 355 and the Sempron 64 LE-1100 may still be able to run slightly older games fairly effectively.

More important for gaming than the number of cores and threads is the clock rate. Problematically, unless the two CPUs are from the same family, this can only serve as a general guide and nothing like an exact comparison, because the clock cycles per instruction (CPI) will vary so much.

The Celeron D 355 and Sempron 64 LE-1100 are not from the same family of CPUs, so their clock speeds are by no means directly comparable. Bear in mind, then, that while the Celeron D 355 has a 1.43 GHz faster frequency, this is not always an indicator that it will be superior in performance, despite frequency being crucial when trying to avoid GPU bottlenecking. In this case, however, the difference is probably a good indicator that the is superior.

Aside from the clock rate, the next-most important CPU features for PC game performance are L2 and L3 cache size. Faster than RAM, the more cache available, the more data that can be stored for lightning-fast retrieval. L1 Cache is not usually an issue anymore for gaming, with most high-end CPUs eking out about the same L1 performance, and L2 is more important than L3 - but L3 is still important if you want to reach the highest levels of performance. Bear in mind that although it is better to have a larger cache, the larger it is, the higher the latency, so a balance has to be struck.

The Celeron D 355 and the Sempron 64 LE-1100 have the same L2 cache size, and neither CPU appears to have an L3 cache. Sadly, there is not enough data to judge based on L1 cache size which CPU would perform better.

The maximum Thermal Design Power is the power in Watts that the CPU will consume in the worst case scenario. The lithography is the semiconductor manufacturing technology being used to create the CPU - the smaller this is, the more transistors that can be fit into the CPU, and the closer the connections. For both the lithography and the TDP, it is the lower the better, because a lower number means a lower amount of power is necessary to run the CPU, and consequently a lower amount of heat is produced.

The Sempron 64 LE-1100 has a 39 Watt lower Maximum TDP than the Celeron D 355, and was created with a 25 nm smaller manufacturing technology. What this means is the Sempron 64 LE-1100 will consume significantly less power and consequently produce less heat, enabling more prolonged computational tasks with fewer adverse effects. This will lower your yearly electricity bill significantly, as well as prevent you from having to invest in extra cooling mechanisms (unless you overclock).

CPU Core Details

CPU CodenamePrescott-256Sparta
MoBo SocketLGA 775/ Socket TSocket AM2
Notebook CPUnono
Release Date01 Apr 200608 Oct 2007
CPU LinkGD LinkGD Link
Approved

CPU Technical Specifications

CPU Cores1vs1
Clock Speed3.33 GHzvs1.9 GHz
Turbo Frequency-vs-
System Bus 533 MHzvs-
Max TDP84 Wvs45 W
Lithography90 nmvs65 nm
Bit Width64 Bitvs-
Voltage Range1.250V-1.400V KBvs-
Max Temperature67.7°Cvs-
Virtualization Technologynovsno
Comparison

CPU Cache and Memory

L1 Cache Size-vs128 KB
L2 Cache Size256 KBvs256 KB
L2 Cache Speed-vs-
L3 Cache Size-vs-
ECC Memory Supportnovsno
Comparison

CPU Graphics

Graphicsno
Base GPU Frequency-vs-
Max GPU Frequency-vs-
DirectX-vs-
Displays Supported-vs-
Comparison

CPU Package and Version Specifications

Package Size37.5mm x 37.5mmvs-
Revision-vs-
PCIe Revision-vs-
PCIe Configurations-vs-

Gaming Performance Value

Performance Value

CPU Mini Review

Mini ReviewBased on the Cedar Mill Pentium 4 core, this version of the Celeron D was launched 28 May 2006,and continued the 3xx naming scheme with the Celeron D 347 (3.06 GHz), 352 (3.2 GHz), 356 (3.33 GHz), 360 (3.46 GHz), and 365 (3.6 GHz). The Cedar Mill Celeron D is largely the same as the Prescott-256, except with double the L2 cache (512 KB) and based on a 65 nm manufacturing process. The Cedar Mill-512 Celeron D is LGA 775 exclusive. The main benefits of the Cedar Mill Celerons over the Prescott Celerons are the slightly increased performance due to the larger L2 cache, higher clock rates, and less heat dissipation, with several models having a TDP lowered to 65 W from Prescott's lowest offering of 73 W.Sempron has been the marketing name used by AMD for several different budget desktop CPUs, using several different technologies and CPU socket formats. The Sempron replaced the AMD Duron processor and competes against Intel's Celeron series of processors. AMD coined the name from the Latin semper, which means always, to suggest the Sempron is suitable for daily use, practical, and part of everyday life.