CPU
GPU
Athlon 64 FX-55
Celeron N3010
Performance Spectrum - CPU
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.
Value Upgrade Path
This is the official ChipVERSUS Value Rating, comparing raw performance (PassMark) per dollar. Components placed above yours deliver better value for money. The Athlon 64 FX-55 is positioned at rank 1134 and the Celeron N3010 is on rank 1164, so the Athlon 64 FX-55 offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar Athlon 64 FX-55
Performance Per Dollar Celeron N3010
Performance Comparison
About PassMark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
| Insight | Athlon 64 FX-55 | Celeron N3010 |
|---|---|---|
| Gaming | ✅ Superior gaming performance | ❌ Lower gaming performance |
| Workstation | ❌ Weaker in multi-core tasks | ✅ Better multi-core power |
| Price | ✅ More affordable ($50) | ⚠️ Higher cost ($107) |
| Longevity | 🛑 Legacy (Clawhammer (2001−2005) / 130 nm) | 🛑 Legacy (Airmont (2016) / 14 nm) |
💎 Value Proposition
| Insight | Athlon 64 FX-55 | Celeron N3010 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ✅ Better overall value (+101%) | ❌ Lower cost efficiency |
| Upfront Cost | ✅ More affordable ($50) | ⚠️ Higher cost ($107) |
Performance Check
To accurately isolate CPU performance, all benchmarks below use an NVIDIA RTX 4090 as the reference GPU. This eliminates GPU-side bottlenecks and highlights pure processing throughput differences between the CPUs.
Note: Real-world results may vary based on your actual GPU. CPU performance impact is more visible in processing-intensive titles and high-refresh-rate gaming scenarios.
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of Athlon 64 FX-55 and Celeron N3010
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.
Celeron N3010
The Celeron N3010 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 10 January 2016 (9 years ago). It is based on the Airmont (2016) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 1.04 GHz, with boost up to 2.24 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 1 MB. Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: FCBGA1170. Thermal design power (TDP): 4 Watt. Memory support: DDR3L-1600. Passmark benchmark score: 735 points. Launch price was $107.
Processing Power
The Athlon 64 FX-55 packs 1 cores / 1 threads, while the Celeron N3010 offers 2 cores / 2 threads — the Celeron N3010 has 1 more core. Boost clocks reach 2.6 GHz on the Athlon 64 FX-55 versus 2.24 GHz on the Celeron N3010 — a 14.9% clock advantage for the Athlon 64 FX-55 (base: 2.6 GHz vs 1.04 GHz). The Athlon 64 FX-55 uses the Clawhammer (2001−2005) architecture (130 nm), while the Celeron N3010 uses Airmont (2016) (14 nm). In PassMark, the Athlon 64 FX-55 scores 690 against the Celeron N3010's 735 — a 6.3% lead for the Celeron N3010. Both processors carry 0 kB of L3 cache.
| Feature | Athlon 64 FX-55 | Celeron N3010 |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 1 / 1 | 2 / 2+100% |
| Boost Clock | 2.6 GHz+16% | 2.24 GHz |
| Base Clock | 2.6 GHz+150% | 1.04 GHz |
| L3 Cache | 0 kB | 0 kB |
| L2 Cache | 1 MB | 1 MB |
| Process | 130 nm | 14 nm-89% |
| Architecture | Clawhammer (2001−2005) | Airmont (2016) |
| PassMark | 690 | 735+7% |
Memory & Platform
The Athlon 64 FX-55 uses the 939 socket (PCIe 1.1), while the Celeron N3010 uses FCBGA1170 (PCIe 3.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR1-400 on the Athlon 64 FX-55 versus 1600 on the Celeron N3010 — the Celeron N3010 supports 199.8% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The Celeron N3010 supports up to 8 of RAM compared to 4 GB — 66.7% more capacity for professional workloads. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. PCIe lanes: 0 (Athlon 64 FX-55) vs 4 (Celeron N3010) — the Celeron N3010 offers 4 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: nForce3,nForce4,Xpress 200 (Athlon 64 FX-55) and Braswell (Celeron N3010).
| Feature | Athlon 64 FX-55 | Celeron N3010 |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | 939 | FCBGA1170 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 1.1 | PCIe 3.0+173% |
| Max RAM Speed | DDR1-400 | 1600+159900% |
| Max RAM Capacity | 4 GB+52428700% | 8 |
| RAM Channels | 2 | 2 |
| ECC Support | ❌ | ❌ |
| PCIe Lanes | 0 | 4 |
Advanced Features
Virtualization: not specified (Athlon 64 FX-55) / true (Celeron N3010). The Celeron N3010 includes integrated graphics (Intel HD Graphics 400), while the Athlon 64 FX-55 requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Celeron N3010 targets Budget Mobile.
| Feature | Athlon 64 FX-55 | Celeron N3010 |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | No | Yes |
| IGPU Model | — | Intel HD Graphics 400 |
| AVX-512 | — | No |
| Virtualization | — | true |
| Target Use | — | Budget Mobile |
Value Analysis
The Athlon 64 FX-55 launched at $827 MSRP, while the Celeron N3010 debuted at $107.
| Feature | Athlon 64 FX-55 | Celeron N3010 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $827 | $107-87% |
| Avg Price (30d) | $50 | — |
| Release Date | 2004 | 2016 |
Top Performing CPUs
The most powerful cpus ranked by PassMark CPU Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar CPU comparisons based on Athlon 64 FX-55 and Celeron N3010
