Athlon 64 3100+ vs Celeron 430

CPU

GPU

Athlon 64 3100+

1 Cores1 Thrd25 WWMax: 2 GHz2008

Similar parts

·······

Buy on Amazon

Celeron 430

1 Cores1 Thrd35 WWMax: 1.8 GHz2007

Similar parts

·······

Buy on Amazon

Athlon 64 3100+ vs Celeron 430 Performance Spectrum

Athlon 64 3100+

1 / 1

475

+6.0%

Athlon XP 2100+

Athlon XP 2400+

Athlon XP 2700+

Mobile Athlon 64 2800+

Ryzen 5 8640HS

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3955WX

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7955WX

Ryzen Threadripper 3990X

Celeron 430

1 / 1

448

0.0%

Atom 230

Pentium 4 2.26

Pentium M 1.40

Mobile Pentium 4 2.66

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 3100+ vs Celeron 430 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 3100+ vs Celeron 430: 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 3100+

2008

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +9.1% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Draws 25W instead of 35W, a 10W reduction.
✅100+% more PCIe lanes (16 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 4.8 vs 9.1 PassMark/$ ($100 MSRP vs $49 MSRP).

Celeron 430

2007

Why buy it

✅Costs $51 less on MSRP ($49 MSRP vs $100 MSRP).
✅Delivers 92.5% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 9.1 vs 4.8 PassMark/$ ($49 MSRP vs $100 MSRP).

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Athlon 64 3100+ across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (448 vs 475).
❌40% higher power demand at 35W vs 25W.

Quick Answers

So, is Athlon 64 3100+ better than Celeron 430?

Yes. Athlon 64 3100+ is the better all-around CPU here. It gives you a 9.1% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data, 6% 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, Athlon 64 3100+ is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 9.1% 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, Athlon 64 3100+ is the stronger fit. You are getting 6% better PassMark, backed by 1 cores and 1 threads.

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

Athlon 64 3100+ is still the much better call for a fresh build. Athlon 64 3100+ comes in 104.1% more expensive on MSRP at $100 MSRP versus $49 MSRP, and it still gives you a 9.1% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. Celeron 430 only looks stronger on raw value math because it is extremely cheap, but that usually means used-market pricing on an obsolete 2007 platform. Even with 92.5% better value on paper (9.1 vs 4.8 PassMark/$), it really only makes sense as a cheap stopgap or a niche existing-platform option for someone already on LGA775.

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

Athlon 64 3100+ makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2008 vs 2007) and more multi-core headroom with 1 cores / 1 threads instead of 1/1. That extra compute headroom is more likely to matter as games, background tasks, and creator workloads get heavier.

Athlon 64 3100+ vs Celeron 430 Technical Specifications

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

Athlon 64 3100+

The Athlon 64 3100+ is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 2009-01-01. It is based on the Lima (2008−2009) architecture. It features 1 cores and 1 threads. Max frequency: 2 GHz. L2 cache: 512K. Built on 65 nm process technology. Socket: AM2. Thermal design power (TDP): 25 Watt. Memory support: DDR2. Passmark benchmark score: 475 points. Launch price was $149.

Celeron 430

The Celeron 430 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 3 June 2007 (18 years ago). It is based on the Conroe-L (2007−2008) architecture. It features 1 cores and 1 threads. Base frequency is 1.8 GHz, with boost up to 1.8 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 512 kB. Built on 65 nm process technology. Socket: LGA775. Thermal design power (TDP): 35 Watt. Memory support: DDR1, DDR2, DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 448 points. Launch price was $50.

⚡

Processing Power

Both the Athlon 64 3100+ and Celeron 430 share an identical 1-core/1-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 2 GHz on the Athlon 64 3100+ versus 1.8 GHz on the Celeron 430 — a 10.5% clock advantage for the Athlon 64 3100+. The Athlon 64 3100+ uses the Lima (2008−2009) architecture (65 nm), while the Celeron 430 uses Conroe-L (2007−2008) (65 nm). In PassMark, the Athlon 64 3100+ scores 475 against the Celeron 430's 448 — a 5.9% lead for the Athlon 64 3100+. Geekbench 6 single-core — the metric most relevant to gaming — records 280 vs 226, a 21.3% lead for the Athlon 64 3100+ that directly translates to higher frame rates.

Feature	Athlon 64 3100+	Celeron 430
Cores / Threads	1 / 1	1 / 1
Boost Clock	2 GHz+11%	1.8 GHz
Base Clock	—	1.8 GHz
L3 Cache	—	0 kB
L2 Cache	512K	512 kB
Process	65 nm	65 nm
Architecture	Lima (2008−2009)	Conroe-L (2007−2008)
PassMark	475+6%	448
Geekbench 6 Single	280+24%	226
Geekbench 6 Multi	280	—

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Athlon 64 3100+ uses the AM2 socket (PCIe 2.0), while the Celeron 430 uses LGA775 (PCIe 1.1) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Both support up to DDR2-800 memory speed. Both support up to 4 GB of RAM. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. PCIe lanes: 16 (Athlon 64 3100+) vs 0 (Celeron 430) — the Athlon 64 3100+ offers 16 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: nForce 500,AMD 690G (Athlon 64 3100+) and 945,G31,G41 (Celeron 430).

Feature	Athlon 64 3100+	Celeron 430
Socket	AM2	LGA775
PCIe Generation	PCIe 2.0+82%	PCIe 1.1
Max RAM Speed	DDR2-800	DDR2-800
Max RAM Capacity	4 GB	4 GB
RAM Channels	2	2
ECC Support	No	No
PCIe Lanes	16	0

🔧

Advanced Features

Neither processor supports overclocking. Virtualization support: AMD-V (Athlon 64 3100+) vs No (Celeron 430). Primary use case: Athlon 64 3100+ targets Legacy Desktop, Celeron 430 targets Budget. Direct competitor: Athlon 64 3100+ rivals Celeron D 352; Celeron 430 rivals Pentium 4 2.80.

Feature	Athlon 64 3100+	Celeron 430
Integrated GPU	No	No
Unlocked	No	No
AVX-512	No	No
Virtualization	AMD-V	No
Target Use	Legacy Desktop	Budget

💰

Value Analysis

At launch, the Athlon 64 3100+ was priced at $100, while the Celeron 430 came in at $49. On launch pricing ($100 vs $49), Celeron 430 was $51 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Athlon 64 3100+ delivers 4.8 pts/$ vs 9.1 pts/$ for the Celeron 430 — making the Celeron 430 the 63.2% better value option.

Feature	Athlon 64 3100+	Celeron 430
MSRP	$100	$49-51%
Performance per Dollar	4.8	9.1+90%
Release Date	2008	2007

Search Athlon 64 3100+ on Amazon

Search Celeron 430 on Amazon

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.