Athlon 64 2800+ vs Celeron 2.80
Athlon 64 2800+
Celeron 2.80
Performance Spectrum - CPU
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.
Value Upgrade Path
This is the official ChipVERSUS Value Rating, comparing raw performance (PassMark) per dollar. Components placed above yours deliver better value for money. The Athlon 64 2800+ is positioned at rank 1098 and the Celeron 2.80 is on rank 1076, so the Celeron 2.80 offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar Athlon 64 2800+
Performance Per Dollar Celeron 2.80
Performance Comparison
About PassMark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
| Insight | Athlon 64 2800+ | Celeron 2.80 |
|---|---|---|
| Gaming | ❌ Lower gaming performance | ✅ Superior gaming performance |
| Workstation | ❌ Weaker in multi-core tasks | ✅ Better multi-core power |
| Price | Equivalent pricing | Equivalent pricing |
| Longevity | 🛑 Legacy (NewCastle (2004) / 130 nm) | 🛑 Legacy (Northwood (2002−2004) / 130 nm) |
💎 Value Proposition
| Insight | Athlon 64 2800+ | Celeron 2.80 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ❌ Lower cost efficiency | ✅ Better overall value (+2%) |
| Upfront Cost | Equivalent pricing | Equivalent pricing |
Performance Check
To accurately isolate CPU performance, all benchmarks below use an NVIDIA RTX 4090 as the reference GPU. This eliminates GPU-side bottlenecks and highlights pure processing throughput differences between the CPUs.
Note: Real-world results may vary based on your actual GPU. CPU performance impact is more visible in processing-intensive titles and high-refresh-rate gaming scenarios.
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of Athlon 64 2800+ and Celeron 2.80
Athlon 64 2800+
The Athlon 64 2800+ is manufactured by AMD. It was released in Abril 2004 (21 years ago). It is based on the NewCastle (2004) architecture. It features 1 cores and 1 threads. Max frequency: 1.8 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 512 kB. Built on 130 nm process technology. Socket: 754. Thermal design power (TDP): 89 Watt. Passmark benchmark score: 420 points. Launch price was $100.
Celeron 2.80
The Celeron 2.80 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 2007-01-01. It is based on the Northwood (2002−2004) architecture. It features 1 cores and 1 threads. Max frequency: 2.8 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 128 kB. Built on 130 nm process technology. Socket: PGA478. Thermal design power (TDP): 73 Watt. Memory support: DDR1, DDR2. Passmark benchmark score: 428 points. Launch price was $69.
Processing Power
Both the Athlon 64 2800+ and Celeron 2.80 share an identical 1-core/1-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 1.8 GHz on the Athlon 64 2800+ versus 2.8 GHz on the Celeron 2.80 — a 43.5% clock advantage for the Celeron 2.80. The Athlon 64 2800+ uses the NewCastle (2004) architecture (130 nm), while the Celeron 2.80 uses Northwood (2002−2004) (130 nm). In PassMark, the Athlon 64 2800+ scores 420 against the Celeron 2.80's 428 — a 1.9% lead for the Celeron 2.80. Both processors carry 0 kB of L3 cache.
| Feature | Athlon 64 2800+ | Celeron 2.80 |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 1 / 1 | 1 / 1 |
| Boost Clock | 1.8 GHz | 2.8 GHz+56% |
| L3 Cache | 0 kB | 0 kB |
| L2 Cache | 512 kB+300% | 128 kB |
| Process | 130 nm | 130 nm |
| Architecture | NewCastle (2004) | Northwood (2002−2004) |
| PassMark | 420 | 428+2% |
Memory & Platform
The Athlon 64 2800+ uses the 754 socket (PCIe 1.1), while the Celeron 2.80 uses PGA478 (PCIe 1.1) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR-400 on the Athlon 64 2800+ versus DDR1-400 on the Celeron 2.80 — the Celeron 2.80 supports -201% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. Both support up to 4 GB of RAM. Both feature 1-channel memory with ECC support. Both provide 0 PCIe lanes. Chipset compatibility: AMD 754 (Athlon 64 2800+) and 845,848,865,875 (Celeron 2.80).
| Feature | Athlon 64 2800+ | Celeron 2.80 |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | 754 | PGA478 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 1.1 | PCIe 1.1 |
| Max RAM Speed | DDR-400 | DDR1-400 |
| Max RAM Capacity | 4 GB | 4 GB |
| RAM Channels | 1 | 1 |
| ECC Support | ❌ | ❌ |
| PCIe Lanes | 0 | 0 |
Advanced Features
Virtualization: not specified (Athlon 64 2800+) / No (Celeron 2.80). Primary use case: Celeron 2.80 targets Budget. Direct competitor: Celeron 2.80 rivals Pentium 4 2.80.
| Feature | Athlon 64 2800+ | Celeron 2.80 |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | No | No |
| Unlocked | — | No |
| AVX-512 | — | No |
| Virtualization | — | No |
| Target Use | — | Budget |
Value Analysis
The Athlon 64 2800+ launched at $178 MSRP, while the Celeron 2.80 debuted at $100. At current prices ($15 vs $15), the Celeron 2.80 is $0 cheaper. In terms of value (PassMark points per dollar), the Athlon 64 2800+ delivers 28.0 pts/$ vs 28.5 pts/$ for the Celeron 2.80 — making the Celeron 2.80 the 1.9% better value option.
| Feature | Athlon 64 2800+ | Celeron 2.80 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $178 | $100-44% |
| Avg Price (30d) | $15 | $15 |
| Performance per Dollar | 28.0 | 28.5+2% |
| Release Date | 2004 | 2003 |
Top Performing CPUs
The most powerful cpus ranked by PassMark CPU Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar CPU comparisons based on Athlon 64 2800+ and Celeron 2.80
