CPU
GPU
Athlon 64 FX-57
Celeron B820
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-57 is positioned at rank 1137 and the Celeron B820 is on rank 1109, so the Celeron B820 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-57
Performance Per Dollar Celeron B820
Performance Comparison
About PassMark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
| Insight | Athlon 64 FX-57 | Celeron B820 |
|---|---|---|
| Gaming | ✅ Superior gaming performance | ❌ Lower gaming performance |
| Workstation | ❌ Weaker in multi-core tasks | ✅ Better multi-core power |
| Price | ⚠️ Higher cost ($200) | ✅ More affordable ($15) |
| Longevity | 🛑 Legacy (San Diego (2001−2005) / 90 nm) | 🛑 Legacy (Sandy Bridge (2011−2013) / 32 nm) |
💎 Value Proposition
| Insight | Athlon 64 FX-57 | Celeron B820 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ❌ Lower cost efficiency | ✅ Better overall value (+1317%) |
| Upfront Cost | ⚠️ Higher cost ($200) | ✅ More affordable ($15) |
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-57 and Celeron B820
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.
Celeron B820
The Celeron B820 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 1.7 GHz, with boost up to 1.7 GHz. L3 cache: 2 MB (total). L2 cache: 256K (per core). Built on 32 nm process technology. Socket: PGA988. Thermal design power (TDP): 35 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 765 points. Launch price was $86.
Processing Power
The Athlon 64 FX-57 packs 1 cores / 1 threads, while the Celeron B820 offers 2 cores / 2 threads — the Celeron B820 has 1 more core. Boost clocks reach 2.8 GHz on the Athlon 64 FX-57 versus 1.7 GHz on the Celeron B820 — a 48.9% 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 B820 uses Sandy Bridge (2011−2013) (32 nm). In PassMark, the Athlon 64 FX-57 scores 720 against the Celeron B820's 765 — a 6.1% lead for the Celeron B820. L3 cache: 0 kB on the Athlon 64 FX-57 vs 2 MB (total) on the Celeron B820.
| Feature | Athlon 64 FX-57 | Celeron B820 |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 1 / 1 | 2 / 2+100% |
| Boost Clock | 2.8 GHz+65% | 1.7 GHz |
| Base Clock | — | 1.7 GHz |
| L3 Cache | 0 kB | 2 MB (total) |
| L2 Cache | 1 MB+300% | 256K (per core) |
| Process | 90 nm | 32 nm-64% |
| Architecture | San Diego (2001−2005) | Sandy Bridge (2011−2013) |
| PassMark | 720 | 765+6% |
Memory & Platform
The Athlon 64 FX-57 uses the 939 socket (PCIe 1.1), while the Celeron B820 uses PGA988 (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 B820 — the Celeron B820 supports -203% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The Celeron B820 supports up to 16 GB of RAM compared to 4 GB — 120% more capacity for professional workloads. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. PCIe lanes: 0 (Athlon 64 FX-57) vs 16 (Celeron B820) — the Celeron B820 offers 16 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: AMD 939 (Athlon 64 FX-57) and HM65,HM67,QM67,QM77 (Celeron B820).
| Feature | Athlon 64 FX-57 | Celeron B820 |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | 939 | PGA988 |
| 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 | ❌ | ❌ |
| PCIe Lanes | 0 | 16 |
Advanced Features
Virtualization: not specified (Athlon 64 FX-57) / VT-x (Celeron B820). The Celeron B820 includes integrated graphics (HD Graphics (Sandy Bridge)), while the Athlon 64 FX-57 requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Celeron B820 targets Budget. Direct competitor: Celeron B820 rivals Pentium 967.
| Feature | Athlon 64 FX-57 | Celeron B820 |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | No | Yes |
| IGPU Model | — | HD Graphics (Sandy Bridge) |
| Unlocked | — | No |
| AVX-512 | — | No |
| Virtualization | — | VT-x |
| Target Use | — | Budget |
Value Analysis
The Athlon 64 FX-57 launched at $1031 MSRP, while the Celeron B820 debuted at $86. At current prices ($200 vs $15), the Celeron B820 is $185 cheaper. In terms of value (PassMark points per dollar), the Athlon 64 FX-57 delivers 3.6 pts/$ vs 51.0 pts/$ for the Celeron B820 — making the Celeron B820 the 173.6% better value option.
| Feature | Athlon 64 FX-57 | Celeron B820 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $1031 | $86-92% |
| Avg Price (30d) | $200 | $15-93% |
| Performance per Dollar | 3.6 | 51.0+1317% |
| Release Date | 2005 | 2012 |
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-57 and Celeron B820
