Athlon 64 3400+ vs Celeron 807

Athlon 64 3400+ vs Celeron 807 Performance Spectrum

Athlon 64 3400+

1 / 1

545

+1.9%

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3955WX

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7955WX

Ryzen Threadripper 3990X

Celeron 807

1 / 2

535

0.0%

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 3400+ vs Celeron 807 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 3400+ vs Celeron 807: 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 3400+

2001

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +8.9% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 1.2 vs 7.6 PassMark/$ ($440 MSRP vs $70 MSRP).
❌423.5% higher power demand at 89W vs 17W.
❌No integrated graphics, while Celeron 807 can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Celeron 807

2012

Why buy it

✅Costs $370 less on MSRP ($70 MSRP vs $440 MSRP).
✅Delivers 517.0% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 7.6 vs 1.2 PassMark/$ ($70 MSRP vs $440 MSRP).
✅Draws 17W instead of 89W, a 72W reduction.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with HD Graphics (Sandy Bridge), while Athlon 64 3400+ needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Athlon 64 3400+ across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (535 vs 545).

Quick Answers

So, is Athlon 64 3400+ better than Celeron 807?

Yes. Athlon 64 3400+ is the better all-around CPU here. It gives you a 8.9% 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, Athlon 64 3400+ is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 8.9% 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 3400+ 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?

Athlon 64 3400+ is the easy recommendation for a fresh desktop build. Athlon 64 3400+ comes in 528.6% more expensive on MSRP at $440 MSRP versus $70 MSRP, and it still gives you a 8.9% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. Celeron 807 only looks good on raw value math because it is a cheap legacy laptop chip, not because it is a real desktop gaming recommendation. It simply does not keep up in modern games, especially when the gap is already 8.9% in the shared gaming data.

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

Celeron 807 makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2012 vs 2001). That makes it the safer long-term bet.

Athlon 64 3400+ vs Celeron 807 Technical Specifications

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

Athlon 64 3400+

The Athlon 64 3400+ is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 2009-01-01. It is based on the Clawhammer (2001−2005) architecture. It features 1 cores and 1 threads. Max frequency: 2.4 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 512K. Built on 130 nm process technology. Socket: 754. Thermal design power (TDP): 89 Watt. Passmark benchmark score: 545 points. Launch price was $149.

Celeron 807

The Celeron 807 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 1 July 2012 (13 years ago). It is based on the Sandy Bridge (2011−2013) architecture. It features 1 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 1.5 GHz, with boost up to 1.5 GHz. L3 cache: 1.5 MB (total). L2 cache: 256K (per core). Built on 32 nm process technology. Socket: BGA1023. Thermal design power (TDP): 17 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 535 points. Launch price was $70.

⚡

Processing Power

The Athlon 64 3400+ packs 1 cores / 1 threads, matching the Celeron 807's 1 cores. Boost clocks reach 2.4 GHz on the Athlon 64 3400+ versus 1.5 GHz on the Celeron 807 — a 46.2% clock advantage for the Athlon 64 3400+. The Athlon 64 3400+ uses the Clawhammer (2001−2005) architecture (130 nm), while the Celeron 807 uses Sandy Bridge (2011−2013) (32 nm). In PassMark, the Athlon 64 3400+ scores 545 against the Celeron 807's 535 — a 1.9% lead for the Athlon 64 3400+. L3 cache: 0 kB on the Athlon 64 3400+ vs 1.5 MB (total) on the Celeron 807.

Feature	Athlon 64 3400+	Celeron 807
Cores / Threads	1 / 1	1 / 2
Boost Clock	2.4 GHz+60%	1.5 GHz
Base Clock	—	1.5 GHz
L3 Cache	0 kB	1.5 MB (total)
L2 Cache	512K+100%	256K (per core)
Process	130 nm	32 nm-75%
Architecture	Clawhammer (2001−2005)	Sandy Bridge (2011−2013)
PassMark	545+2%	535

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Athlon 64 3400+ uses the 754 socket (PCIe 1.1), while the Celeron 807 uses BGA1023 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR-400 on the Athlon 64 3400+ versus DDR3-1333 on the Celeron 807 — the Celeron 807 supports -433.2% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The Celeron 807 supports up to 16 GB of RAM compared to 4 GB — 300% more capacity for professional workloads. Memory channels: 1 (Athlon 64 3400+) vs 2 (Celeron 807). Both provide 0 PCIe lanes. Chipset compatibility: AMD 754 (Athlon 64 3400+) and QM67,QS67,HM67,HM65 (Celeron 807).

Feature	Athlon 64 3400+	Celeron 807
Socket	754	BGA1023
PCIe Generation	PCIe 1.1	PCIe 2.0+82%
Max RAM Speed	DDR-400	DDR3-1333
Max RAM Capacity	4 GB	16 GB+300%
RAM Channels	1	2+100%
ECC Support	No	No
PCIe Lanes	0	0

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization: not specified (Athlon 64 3400+) / VT-x (Celeron 807). The Celeron 807 includes integrated graphics (HD Graphics (Sandy Bridge)), while the Athlon 64 3400+ requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Celeron 807 targets Mobile.

Feature	Athlon 64 3400+	Celeron 807
Integrated GPU	No	Yes
IGPU Model	—	HD Graphics (Sandy Bridge)
Unlocked	—	No
AVX-512	—	No
Virtualization	—	VT-x
Target Use	—	Mobile

💰

Value Analysis

At launch, the Athlon 64 3400+ was priced at $440, while the Celeron 807 came in at $70. On launch pricing ($440 vs $70), Celeron 807 was $370 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Athlon 64 3400+ delivers 1.2 pts/$ vs 7.6 pts/$ for the Celeron 807 — making the Celeron 807 the 144.2% better value option.

Feature	Athlon 64 3400+	Celeron 807
MSRP	$440	$70-84%
Performance per Dollar	1.2	7.6+533%
Release Date	2001	2012

Search Athlon 64 3400+ on Amazon

Search Celeron 807 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.