Athlon 64 FX-55 vs Celeron N3010

CPU

GPU

Athlon 64 FX-55

1 Cores1 Thrd104 WWMax: 2.6 GHz2004

Similar parts

·······

Buy on Amazon

Celeron N3010

2 Cores2 Thrd4 WWMax: 2.24 GHz2016

Similar parts

·······

Buy on Amazon

Athlon 64 FX-55 vs Celeron N3010 Performance Spectrum

Athlon 64 FX-55

1 / 1

690

0.0%

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3955WX

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7955WX

Ryzen Threadripper 3990X

Celeron N3010

2 / 2

735

+6.5%

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 N3010 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 FX-55 vs Celeron N3010: 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

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Celeron N3010 across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (690 vs 735).
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 0.8 vs 6.9 PassMark/$ ($827 MSRP vs $107 MSRP).
❌2500% higher power demand at 104W vs 4W.
❌No integrated graphics, while Celeron N3010 can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Celeron N3010

2016

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +5.6% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Costs $720 less on MSRP ($107 MSRP vs $827 MSRP).
✅Delivers 723.3% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 6.9 vs 0.8 PassMark/$ ($107 MSRP vs $827 MSRP).
✅Draws 4W instead of 104W, a 100W reduction.
✅100+% more PCIe lanes (4 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Trade-offs

❌Fewer obvious downsides in this matchup outside of normal market pricing swings.

Quick Answers

So, is Celeron N3010 better than Athlon 64 FX-55?

Yes. Celeron N3010 is the better all-around CPU here. It gives you a 5.6% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data, 6.5% 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, Celeron N3010 is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 5.6% 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, Celeron N3010 is the stronger fit. You are getting 6.5% better PassMark, backed by 2 cores and 2 threads.

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

Celeron N3010 is the better buy right now. Celeron N3010 comes in $720 cheaper on MSRP at $107 MSRP versus $827 MSRP, and it still gives you a 5.6% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. It is also 723.3% better value on MSRP (6.9 vs 0.8 PassMark/$), so you are getting the faster CPU without taking a value hit on paper.

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

Celeron N3010 makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2016 vs 2004) and more multi-core headroom with 2 cores / 2 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 FX-55 vs Celeron N3010 Technical Specifications

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

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 300% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The Celeron N3010 supports up to 8 GB of RAM compared to 4 GB — 100% 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+300%
Max RAM Capacity	4 GB	8 GB+100%
RAM Channels	2	2
ECC Support	No	No
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

At launch, the Athlon 64 FX-55 was priced at $827, while the Celeron N3010 came in at $107. On launch pricing ($827 vs $107), Celeron N3010 was $720 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Athlon 64 FX-55 delivers 0.8 pts/$ vs 6.9 pts/$ for the Celeron N3010 — making the Celeron N3010 the 156.7% better value option.

Feature	Athlon 64 FX-55	Celeron N3010
MSRP	$827	$107-87%
Performance per Dollar	0.8	6.9+763%
Release Date	2004	2016

Search Athlon 64 FX-55 on Amazon

Search Celeron N3010 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.