Athlon 64 FX-57 vs Celeron 877

AMD

Athlon 64 FX-57

1 Cores1 Thrd104 WWMax: 2.8 GHz2005
Similar parts
·······
VS
Intel

Celeron 877

2 Cores2 Thrd17 WWMax: 1.4 GHz2012

Athlon 64 FX-57 vs Celeron 877 Performance Spectrum

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-57 vs Celeron 877 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-57 vs Celeron 877: 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-57

2005

Why buy it

    Trade-offs

    • Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Celeron 877 across 49 shared CPU benchmark tests.
    • Lower PassMark (720 vs 805).
    • Lower PassMark per dollar, at 0.7 vs 9.4 PassMark/$ ($1,031 MSRP vs $86 MSRP).
    • 511.8% higher power demand at 104W vs 17W.
    • No integrated graphics, while Celeron 877 can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

    Celeron 877

    2012

    Why buy it

    • Better for gaming: +9.4% higher average FPS across 49 shared CPU benchmark tests.
    • Costs $945 less on MSRP ($86 MSRP vs $1,031 MSRP).
    • Delivers 1240.4% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 9.4 vs 0.7 PassMark/$ ($86 MSRP vs $1,031 MSRP).
    • Draws 17W instead of 104W, a 87W reduction.
    • 100+% more PCIe lanes (16 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 877 better than Athlon 64 FX-57?
    Yes. Celeron 877 is the better all-around CPU here. It gives you a 9.4% average FPS lead across 49 shared CPU game tests in our data, 11.8% 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 877 is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 9.4% more average FPS across 49 shared CPU game tests.
    Which one is better for streaming, content creation, and heavy multitasking?
    For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Celeron 877 is the stronger fit. You are getting 11.8% better PassMark, backed by 2 cores and 2 threads.
    Which one is the smarter buy today, not just the cheaper CPU?
    Celeron 877 is the better buy right now. Celeron 877 comes in $945 cheaper on MSRP at $86 MSRP versus $1,031 MSRP, and it still gives you a 9.4% average FPS lead across 49 shared CPU game tests in our data. It is also 1240.4% better value on MSRP (9.4 vs 0.7 PassMark/$), 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 877 makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2012 vs 2005) 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-57 vs Celeron 877 Technical Specifications

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

    AMD

    Athlon 64 FX-57

    The Athlon 64 FX-57 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 2009-01-01. It is based on the San Diego (2001−2005) architecture. It features 1 cores and 1 threads. Max frequency: 2.8 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 1 MB. Built on 90 nm process technology. Socket: 939. Thermal design power (TDP): 104 Watt. Passmark benchmark score: 720 points. Launch price was $149.

    Intel

    Celeron 877

    The Celeron 877 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 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 1.4 GHz, with boost up to 1.4 GHz. L3 cache: 2 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: 805 points. Launch price was $86.

    Processing Power

    The Athlon 64 FX-57 packs 1 cores / 1 threads, while the Celeron 877 offers 2 cores / 2 threads — the Celeron 877 has 1 more core. Boost clocks reach 2.8 GHz on the Athlon 64 FX-57 versus 1.4 GHz on the Celeron 877 — a 66.7% clock advantage for the Athlon 64 FX-57. The Athlon 64 FX-57 uses the San Diego (2001−2005) architecture (90 nm), while the Celeron 877 uses Sandy Bridge (2011−2013) (32 nm). In PassMark, the Athlon 64 FX-57 scores 720 against the Celeron 877's 805 — a 11.1% lead for the Celeron 877. L3 cache: 0 kB on the Athlon 64 FX-57 vs 2 MB (total) on the Celeron 877.

    FeatureAthlon 64 FX-57Celeron 877
    Cores / Threads
    1 / 1
    2 / 2+100%
    Boost Clock
    2.8 GHz+100%
    1.4 GHz
    Base Clock
    1.4 GHz
    L3 Cache
    0 kB
    2 MB (total)
    L2 Cache
    1 MB
    256K (per core)+25500%
    Process
    90 nm
    32 nm-64%
    Architecture
    San Diego (2001−2005)
    Sandy Bridge (2011−2013)
    PassMark
    720
    805+12%
    🧠

    Memory & Platform

    The Athlon 64 FX-57 uses the 939 socket (PCIe 1.1), while the Celeron 877 uses BGA1023 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR-400 on the Athlon 64 FX-57 versus DDR3-1333 on the Celeron 877 — the Celeron 877 supports -433.2% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The Celeron 877 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-57) vs 16 (Celeron 877) — the Celeron 877 offers 16 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: AMD 939 (Athlon 64 FX-57) and HM65,HM67,HM75,HM76,HM77 (Celeron 877).

    FeatureAthlon 64 FX-57Celeron 877
    Socket
    939
    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
    2
    2
    ECC Support
    No
    No
    PCIe Lanes
    0
    16
    🔧

    Advanced Features

    Virtualization: not specified (Athlon 64 FX-57) / VT-x (Celeron 877). The Celeron 877 includes integrated graphics (HD Graphics (Sandy Bridge)), while the Athlon 64 FX-57 requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Celeron 877 targets Budget. Direct competitor: Celeron 877 rivals Pentium 967.

    FeatureAthlon 64 FX-57Celeron 877
    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 FX-57 was priced at $1031, while the Celeron 877 came in at $86. On launch pricing ($1031 vs $86), Celeron 877 was $945 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Athlon 64 FX-57 delivers 0.7 pts/$ vs 9.4 pts/$ for the Celeron 877 — making the Celeron 877 the 172.2% better value option.

    FeatureAthlon 64 FX-57Celeron 877
    MSRP
    $1031
    $86-92%
    Performance per Dollar
    0.7
    9.4+1243%
    Release Date
    2005
    2012

    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.