Athlon 64 2800+ vs Celeron 2.80

AMD

Athlon 64 2800+

1 Cores1 Thrd89 WWMax: 1.8 GHz2004
Similar parts
·······
VS
Intel

Celeron 2.80

1 Cores1 Thrd73 WWMax: 2.8 GHz2003
Similar parts
·······

Athlon 64 2800+ vs Celeron 2.80 Performance Spectrum

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.

Athlon 64 2800+ vs Celeron 2.80 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.

Athlon 64 2800+ vs Celeron 2.80: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

Athlon 64 2800+

2004

Why buy it

    Trade-offs

    • Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Celeron 2.80 across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
    • Lower PassMark (420 vs 428).
    • Lower PassMark per dollar, at 2.4 vs 4.3 PassMark/$ ($178 MSRP vs $100 MSRP).
    • 21.9% higher power demand at 89W vs 73W.

    Celeron 2.80

    2003

    Why buy it

    • Better for gaming: +9.8% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
    • Costs $78 less on MSRP ($100 MSRP vs $178 MSRP).
    • Delivers 81.4% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 4.3 vs 2.4 PassMark/$ ($100 MSRP vs $178 MSRP).
    • Draws 73W instead of 89W, a 16W reduction.

    Trade-offs

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

    Quick Answers

    So, is Celeron 2.80 better than Athlon 64 2800+?
    Yes. Celeron 2.80 is the better all-around CPU here. It gives you a 9.8% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data and 1.9% better PassMark, which is enough to make it the stronger overall pick.
    Which one is better for gaming?
    If gaming is the priority, Celeron 2.80 is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 9.8% 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 2.80 is the stronger fit. You are getting 1.9% better PassMark, backed by 1 cores and 1 threads.
    Which one is the smarter buy today, not just the cheaper CPU?
    Celeron 2.80 is the better buy right now. Celeron 2.80 comes in $78 cheaper on MSRP at $100 MSRP versus $178 MSRP, and it still gives you a 9.8% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. It is also 81.4% better value on MSRP (4.3 vs 2.4 PassMark/$), so you are getting the faster CPU without taking a value hit on paper.
    Which one is more future-proof for 2026 and beyond?
    Athlon 64 2800+ makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2004 vs 2003). That makes it the safer long-term bet.

    Athlon 64 2800+ vs Celeron 2.80 Technical Specifications

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

    AMD

    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.

    Intel

    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.

    FeatureAthlon 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 -200% 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).

    FeatureAthlon 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
    No
    No
    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.

    FeatureAthlon 64 2800+Celeron 2.80
    Integrated GPU
    No
    No
    Unlocked
    No
    AVX-512
    No
    Virtualization
    No
    Target Use
    Budget
    💰

    Value Analysis

    At launch, the Athlon 64 2800+ was priced at $178, while the Celeron 2.80 came in at $100. On launch pricing ($178 vs $100), Celeron 2.80 was $78 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Athlon 64 2800+ delivers 2.4 pts/$ vs 4.3 pts/$ for the Celeron 2.80 — making the Celeron 2.80 the 57.8% better value option.

    FeatureAthlon 64 2800+Celeron 2.80
    MSRP
    $178
    $100-44%
    Performance per Dollar
    2.4
    4.3+79%
    Release Date
    2004
    2003

    Affiliate Disclosure

    ChipVERSUS is a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to Amazon.com. We may earn a commission on qualifying purchases made through our links. This comes at no additional cost to you and helps support our work in providing comprehensive PC building guides and tools.

    Amazon and the Amazon logo are trademarks of Amazon.com, Inc. or its affiliates.