Athlon 64 4000+ vs Celeron B720

CPU

GPU

Athlon 64 4000+

1 Cores1 Thrd89 WWMax: 2.6 GHz2001

Similar parts

·······

Buy on Amazon

Celeron B720

1 Cores1 Thrd0 WWMax: 1.7 GHz2012

Similar parts

·······

Buy on Amazon

Athlon 64 4000+ vs Celeron B720 Performance Spectrum

Athlon 64 4000+

1 / 1

675

+1.5%

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3955WX

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7955WX

Ryzen Threadripper 3990X

Celeron B720

1 / 1

665

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 4000+ vs Celeron B720 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 4000+ vs Celeron B720: 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 4000+

2001

Why buy it

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 1.4 vs 9.5 PassMark/$ ($482 MSRP vs $70 MSRP).
❌No integrated graphics, while Celeron B720 can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Celeron B720

2012

Why buy it

✅Costs $412 less on MSRP ($70 MSRP vs $482 MSRP).
✅Delivers 578.4% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 9.5 vs 1.4 PassMark/$ ($70 MSRP vs $482 MSRP).
✅100+% more PCIe lanes (16 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with HD Graphics (Sandy Bridge), while Athlon 64 4000+ needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (665 vs 675).

Quick Answers

So, is Athlon 64 4000+ better than Celeron B720?

Yes. Athlon 64 4000+ is the better all-around CPU here. It gives you a 1.6% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data and 1.5% 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 4000+ is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 1.6% 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 4000+ is the stronger fit. You are getting 1.5% better PassMark, backed by 1 cores and 1 threads.

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

Athlon 64 4000+ is still the much better call for a fresh build. Athlon 64 4000+ comes in 588.6% more expensive on MSRP at $482 MSRP versus $70 MSRP, and it still gives you a 1.6% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. Celeron B720 only looks stronger on raw value math because it is extremely cheap, but that usually means used-market pricing on an obsolete 2012 platform. Even with 578.4% better value on paper (9.5 vs 1.4 PassMark/$), it really only makes sense as a cheap stopgap or a niche existing-platform option for someone already on G2.

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

Celeron B720 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 4000+ vs Celeron B720 Technical Specifications

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

Athlon 64 4000+

The Athlon 64 4000+ is manufactured by AMD. It was released in Janeiro 2001 (24 years ago). It is based on the San Diego (2001−2005) architecture. It features 1 cores and 1 threads. Max frequency: 2.6 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 512K. Built on 130 nm process technology. Socket: 939. Thermal design power (TDP): 89 Watt. Passmark benchmark score: 675 points. Launch price was $160.

Celeron B720

The Celeron B720 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 1 January 2012 (13 years ago). It is based on the Sandy Bridge (2011−2013) architecture. It features 1 cores and 1 threads. Base frequency is 1.7 GHz, with boost up to 1.7 GHz. L3 cache: 1.5 MB (total). L2 cache: 256 kB (per core). Built on 32 nm process technology. Socket: G2. Thermal design power (TDP): 35 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 665 points. Launch price was $70.

⚡

Processing Power

Both the Athlon 64 4000+ and Celeron B720 share an identical 1-core/1-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 2.6 GHz on the Athlon 64 4000+ versus 1.7 GHz on the Celeron B720 — a 41.9% clock advantage for the Athlon 64 4000+. The Athlon 64 4000+ uses the San Diego (2001−2005) architecture (130 nm), while the Celeron B720 uses Sandy Bridge (2011−2013) (32 nm). In PassMark, the Athlon 64 4000+ scores 675 against the Celeron B720's 665 — a 1.5% lead for the Athlon 64 4000+. L3 cache: 0 kB on the Athlon 64 4000+ vs 1.5 MB (total) on the Celeron B720.

Feature	Athlon 64 4000+	Celeron B720
Cores / Threads	1 / 1	1 / 1
Boost Clock	2.6 GHz+53%	1.7 GHz
Base Clock	—	1.7 GHz
L3 Cache	0 kB	1.5 MB (total)
L2 Cache	512K+100%	256 kB (per core)
Process	130 nm	32 nm-75%
Architecture	San Diego (2001−2005)	Sandy Bridge (2011−2013)
PassMark	675+2%	665

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Athlon 64 4000+ uses the 939 socket (PCIe 1.1), while the Celeron B720 uses G2 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR2-800 on the Athlon 64 4000+ versus DDR3-1333 on the Celeron B720 — the Celeron B720 supports 66.6% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. Both support up to 16 GB of RAM. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. PCIe lanes: 0 (Athlon 64 4000+) vs 16 (Celeron B720) — the Celeron B720 offers 16 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: AMD AM2 (Athlon 64 4000+) and HM65,HM67,QM67,QM77 (Celeron B720).

Feature	Athlon 64 4000+	Celeron B720
Socket	939	G2
PCIe Generation	PCIe 1.1	PCIe 2.0+82%
Max RAM Speed	DDR2-800	DDR3-1333+67%
Max RAM Capacity	16 GB	16 GB
RAM Channels	2	2
ECC Support	No	No
PCIe Lanes	0	16

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization: not specified (Athlon 64 4000+) / VT-x (Celeron B720). The Celeron B720 includes integrated graphics (HD Graphics (Sandy Bridge)), while the Athlon 64 4000+ requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Celeron B720 targets Budget. Direct competitor: Celeron B720 rivals Pentium 967.

Feature	Athlon 64 4000+	Celeron B720
Integrated GPU	No	Yes
IGPU Model	—	HD Graphics (Sandy Bridge)
Unlocked	—	No
AVX-512	—	No
Virtualization	—	VT-x
Target Use	—	Budget

💰

Value Analysis

At launch, the Athlon 64 4000+ was priced at $482, while the Celeron B720 came in at $70. On launch pricing ($482 vs $70), Celeron B720 was $412 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Athlon 64 4000+ delivers 1.4 pts/$ vs 9.5 pts/$ for the Celeron B720 — making the Celeron B720 the 148.6% better value option.

Feature	Athlon 64 4000+	Celeron B720
MSRP	$482	$70-85%
Performance per Dollar	1.4	9.5+579%
Release Date	2001	2012

Search Athlon 64 4000+ on Amazon

Search Celeron B720 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.