Chipversus Index
Jump to Section

Athlon 64 FX-55 vs Celeron 1047UE

CPUCPUGPUGPU
AMD

Athlon 64 FX-55

1 Cores1 Thrd104 WWMax: 2.6 GHz2004
Similar parts
·······
Buy on Amazon
VS
Intel

Celeron 1047UE

2 Cores2 Thrd512 WWMax: 1.4 GHz2013
Similar parts
·······
Buy on Amazon

Athlon 64 FX-55 vs Celeron 1047UE Performance Spectrum

Athlon 64 FX-55
1 / 1
690
+2.2%
brand logoAthlon MP 2800+
brand logoAthlon 64 3000+
brand logoAthlon 64 3300+
brand logoAthlon 64 3600+
brand logoRyzen 7 PRO 6860Z
brand logoRyzen Threadripper PRO 3955WX
brand logoRyzen Threadripper PRO 7955WX
brand logoRyzen Threadripper 3990X
Celeron 1047UE
2 / 2
675
0.0%
brand logoPentium 4 2.66
brand logoCeleron 430
brand logoAtom E3825
brand logoCore Duo T2050
brand logoCore i7-1370P
brand logoCore Ultra 5 245HX
brand logoCore Ultra 7 265KF
brand logoXeon w9-3575X

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 FX-55 vs Celeron 1047UE 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.

Path of Exile 2

Path of Exile 2

1080P
Athlon 64 FX-55
low17 FPS
medium17 FPS
high17 FPS
ultra17 FPS
1080P
Celeron 1047UE
low17 FPS
medium17 FPS
high17 FPS
ultra17 FPS
Counter-Strike 2

Counter-Strike 2

1080P
Athlon 64 FX-55
low17 FPS
medium17 FPS
high17 FPS
ultra17 FPS
1080P
Celeron 1047UE
low17 FPS
medium17 FPS
high17 FPS
ultra17 FPS
League of Legends

League of Legends

1080P
Athlon 64 FX-55
low17 FPS
medium17 FPS
high17 FPS
ultra17 FPS
1080P
Celeron 1047UE
low17 FPS
medium17 FPS
high17 FPS
ultra17 FPS
Valorant

Valorant

1080P
Athlon 64 FX-55
low17 FPS
medium17 FPS
high17 FPS
ultra17 FPS
1080P
Celeron 1047UE
low17 FPS
medium17 FPS
high17 FPS
ultra17 FPS
Among Us

Among Us

1080P
Athlon 64 FX-55
low17 FPS
medium17 FPS
high17 FPS
ultra17 FPS
1080P
Celeron 1047UE
low17 FPS
medium17 FPS
high17 FPS
ultra17 FPS
Apex Legends

Apex Legends

1080P
Athlon 64 FX-55
low17 FPS
medium17 FPS
high17 FPS
ultra17 FPS
1080P
Celeron 1047UE
low17 FPS
medium17 FPS
high17 FPS
ultra17 FPS
Cyberpunk 2077

Cyberpunk 2077

1080P
Athlon 64 FX-55
low17 FPS
medium17 FPS
high17 FPS
ultra17 FPS
1080P
Celeron 1047UE
low17 FPS
medium17 FPS
high17 FPS
ultra17 FPS
Deadlock

Deadlock

1080P
Athlon 64 FX-55
low17 FPS
medium17 FPS
high17 FPS
ultra17 FPS
1080P
Celeron 1047UE
low17 FPS
medium17 FPS
high17 FPS
ultra17 FPS
Destiny 2

Destiny 2

1080P
Athlon 64 FX-55
low17 FPS
medium17 FPS
high17 FPS
ultra17 FPS
1080P
Celeron 1047UE
low17 FPS
medium17 FPS
high17 FPS
ultra17 FPS
Dota 2

Dota 2

1080P
Athlon 64 FX-55
low17 FPS
medium17 FPS
high17 FPS
ultra17 FPS
1080P
Celeron 1047UE
low17 FPS
medium17 FPS
high17 FPS
ultra17 FPS
Check FPS with Custom Builds

Athlon 64 FX-55 vs Celeron 1047UE: 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 FX-55

2004

Why buy it

  • ✅Draws 104W instead of 512W, a 408W reduction.

Trade-offs

  • ❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 0.8 vs 6.8 PassMark/$ ($827 MSRP vs $100 MSRP).
  • ❌No integrated graphics, while Celeron 1047UE can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Celeron 1047UE

2013

Why buy it

  • ✅Costs $727 less on MSRP ($100 MSRP vs $827 MSRP).
  • ✅Delivers 709.0% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 6.8 vs 0.8 PassMark/$ ($100 MSRP vs $827 MSRP).
  • ✅100+% more PCIe lanes (16 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
  • ✅Integrated graphics onboard with Intel HD Graphics (Ivy Bridge), while Athlon 64 FX-55 needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

  • ❌Lower PassMark (675 vs 690).
  • ❌392.3% higher power demand at 512W vs 104W.

Quick Answers

So, is Athlon 64 FX-55 better than Celeron 1047UE?
Yes. Athlon 64 FX-55 is the better all-around CPU here. It gives you 2.2% 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 FX-55 has the edge because it leads the single-thread side of this matchup with 85.7% higher max boost clock.
Which one is better for streaming, content creation, and heavy multitasking?
For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Athlon 64 FX-55 is the stronger fit. You are getting 2.2% better PassMark, backed by 1 cores and 1 threads.
Which one is the smarter buy today, not just the cheaper CPU?
Athlon 64 FX-55 is the easy recommendation for a fresh desktop build. Athlon 64 FX-55 comes in 727.0% more expensive on MSRP at $827 MSRP versus $100 MSRP, and it still gives you 2.2% higher PassMark. Celeron 1047UE 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.
Which one is more future-proof for 2026 and beyond?
Celeron 1047UE makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2013 vs 2004). That makes it the safer long-term bet.

Athlon 64 FX-55 vs Celeron 1047UE Technical Specifications

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

AMD

Athlon 64 FX-55

The Athlon 64 FX-55 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 10 October 2004 (21 years ago). It is based on the Clawhammer (2001−2005) architecture. It features 1 cores and 1 threads. Base frequency is 2.6 GHz, with boost up to 2.6 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 1 MB. Built on 130 nm process technology. Socket: 939. Thermal design power (TDP): 104 Watt. Memory support: DDR1 Depends on motherboard. Passmark benchmark score: 690 points. Launch price was $180.

Intel

Celeron 1047UE

The Celeron 1047UE is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 20 January 2013 (12 years ago). It is based on the Ivy Bridge (2012−2013) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Max frequency: 1.4 GHz. L3 cache: 2 MB (total). L2 cache: 256K (per core). Built on 22 nm process technology. Socket: BGA1023. Thermal design power (TDP): 512 kB + 2 MB. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 675 points. Launch price was $134.

⚡

Processing Power

The Athlon 64 FX-55 packs 1 cores / 1 threads, while the Celeron 1047UE offers 2 cores / 2 threads — the Celeron 1047UE has 1 more core. Boost clocks reach 2.6 GHz on the Athlon 64 FX-55 versus 1.4 GHz on the Celeron 1047UE — a 60% clock advantage for the Athlon 64 FX-55. The Athlon 64 FX-55 uses the Clawhammer (2001−2005) architecture (130 nm), while the Celeron 1047UE uses Ivy Bridge (2012−2013) (22 nm). In PassMark, the Athlon 64 FX-55 scores 690 against the Celeron 1047UE's 675 — a 2.2% lead for the Athlon 64 FX-55. L3 cache: 0 kB on the Athlon 64 FX-55 vs 2 MB (total) on the Celeron 1047UE.

FeatureAthlon 64 FX-55Celeron 1047UE
Cores / Threads
1 / 1
2 / 2+100%
Boost Clock
2.6 GHz+86%
1.4 GHz
Base Clock
2.6 GHz
—
L3 Cache
0 kB
2 MB (total)
L2 Cache
1 MB
256K (per core)+25500%
Process
130 nm
22 nm-83%
Architecture
Clawhammer (2001−2005)
Ivy Bridge (2012−2013)
PassMark
690+2%
675
Geekbench 6 Single
—
159
Geekbench 6 Multi
—
293
🧠

Memory & Platform

The Athlon 64 FX-55 uses the 939 socket (PCIe 1.1), while the Celeron 1047UE uses BGA1023 (PCIe 3.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR1-400 on the Athlon 64 FX-55 versus DDR3-1600 on the Celeron 1047UE — the Celeron 1047UE supports 300% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The Celeron 1047UE supports up to 16 GB of RAM compared to 4 GB — 300% more capacity for professional workloads. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. PCIe lanes: 0 (Athlon 64 FX-55) vs 16 (Celeron 1047UE) — the Celeron 1047UE offers 16 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: nForce3,nForce4,Xpress 200 (Athlon 64 FX-55) and BGA1023 (Celeron 1047UE).

FeatureAthlon 64 FX-55Celeron 1047UE
Socket
939
BGA1023
PCIe Generation
PCIe 1.1
PCIe 3.0+173%
Max RAM Speed
DDR1-400
DDR3-1600+300%
Max RAM Capacity
4 GB
16 GB+300%
RAM Channels
2
2
ECC Support
No
Yes
PCIe Lanes
0
16
🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization: not specified (Athlon 64 FX-55) / VT-x (Celeron 1047UE). The Celeron 1047UE includes integrated graphics (Intel HD Graphics (Ivy Bridge)), while the Athlon 64 FX-55 requires a dedicated GPU.

FeatureAthlon 64 FX-55Celeron 1047UE
Integrated GPU
No
Yes
IGPU Model
—
Intel HD Graphics (Ivy Bridge)
Unlocked
—
No
AVX-512
—
No
Virtualization
—
VT-x
💰

Value Analysis

At launch, the Athlon 64 FX-55 was priced at $827, while the Celeron 1047UE came in at $100. On launch pricing ($827 vs $100), Celeron 1047UE was $727 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Athlon 64 FX-55 delivers 0.8 pts/$ vs 6.8 pts/$ for the Celeron 1047UE — making the Celeron 1047UE the 156% better value option.

FeatureAthlon 64 FX-55Celeron 1047UE
MSRP
$827
$100-88%
Performance per Dollar
0.8
6.8+750%
Release Date
2004
2013
Search Athlon 64 FX-55 on AmazonSearch Celeron 1047UE 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.