Athlon 64 FX-72 vs Celeron G1840

Athlon 64 FX-72 vs Celeron G1840 Performance Spectrum

Athlon 64 FX-72

2 / 2

1,794

+0.6%

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7955WX

Ryzen Threadripper 3990X

Celeron G1840

2 / 2

1,784

0.0%

Pentium Dual-Core E2200

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-72 vs Celeron G1840 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-72 vs Celeron G1840: 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-72

2006

Why buy it

✅+0.6% higher PassMark.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 2.2 vs 51.0 PassMark/$ ($799 MSRP vs $35 MSRP).
❌150% higher power demand at 125W vs 50W.
❌No integrated graphics, while Celeron G1840 can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Celeron G1840

2014

Why buy it

✅Costs $764 less on MSRP ($35 MSRP vs $799 MSRP).
✅Delivers 2170.1% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 51.0 vs 2.2 PassMark/$ ($35 MSRP vs $799 MSRP).
✅Draws 50W instead of 125W, a 75W reduction.
✅100+% more PCIe lanes (16 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with HD Graphics (Haswell), while Athlon 64 FX-72 needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (1,784 vs 1,794).

Quick Answers

So, is Athlon 64 FX-72 better than Celeron G1840?

Yes. Athlon 64 FX-72 is the better all-around CPU here. It gives you a 0.0% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data and 0.6% better PassMark, which is enough to make it the stronger overall pick.

Which one is better for gaming?

For gaming, this matchup is basically a tie in the data we have.

Which one is better for streaming, content creation, and heavy multitasking?

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Athlon 64 FX-72 is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.6% better PassMark, backed by 2 cores and 2 threads.

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

Athlon 64 FX-72 is still the much better call for a fresh build. Athlon 64 FX-72 comes in 2182.9% more expensive on MSRP at $799 MSRP versus $35 MSRP, and it still gives you a 0.0% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. Celeron G1840 only looks stronger on raw value math because it is extremely cheap, but that usually means used-market pricing on an obsolete 2014 platform. Even with 2170.1% better value on paper (51.0 vs 2.2 PassMark/$), it really only makes sense as a cheap stopgap or a niche existing-platform option for someone already on LGA1150.

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

Celeron G1840 makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2014 vs 2006). That makes it the safer long-term bet.

Athlon 64 FX-72 vs Celeron G1840 Technical Specifications

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

Athlon 64 FX-72

The Athlon 64 FX-72 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 2009-01-01. It is based on the Windsor (2006−2007) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Max frequency: 2.8 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 1 MB. Built on 90 nm process technology. Socket: F. Thermal design power (TDP): 125 Watt. Memory support: DDR1. Passmark benchmark score: 1,794 points. Launch price was $149.

Celeron G1840

The Celeron G1840 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 1 May 2014 (11 years ago). It is based on the Haswell (2013−2015) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 2.8 GHz, with boost up to 2.8 GHz. L3 cache: 3 MB (total). L2 cache: 256 kB (per core). Built on 22 nm process technology. Socket: LGA1150. Thermal design power (TDP): 53 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 1,784 points. Launch price was $53.

⚡

Processing Power

Both the Athlon 64 FX-72 and Celeron G1840 share an identical 2-core/2-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 2.8 GHz on the Athlon 64 FX-72 versus 2.8 GHz on the Celeron G1840 — identical boost frequencies. The Athlon 64 FX-72 uses the Windsor (2006−2007) architecture (90 nm), while the Celeron G1840 uses Haswell (2013−2015) (22 nm). In PassMark, the Athlon 64 FX-72 scores 1,794 against the Celeron G1840's 1,784 — a 0.6% lead for the Athlon 64 FX-72. L3 cache: 0 kB on the Athlon 64 FX-72 vs 3 MB (total) on the Celeron G1840.

Feature	Athlon 64 FX-72	Celeron G1840
Cores / Threads	2 / 2	2 / 2
Boost Clock	2.8 GHz	2.8 GHz
Base Clock	—	2.8 GHz
L3 Cache	0 kB	3 MB (total)
L2 Cache	1 MB+300%	256 kB (per core)
Process	90 nm	22 nm-76%
Architecture	Windsor (2006−2007)	Haswell (2013−2015)
PassMark	1,794	1,784
Geekbench 6 Single	—	488
Geekbench 6 Multi	—	832

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Athlon 64 FX-72 uses the F socket (PCIe 1.1), while the Celeron G1840 uses LGA1150 (PCIe 3.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR2-800 on the Athlon 64 FX-72 versus DDR3-1333 on the Celeron G1840 — the Celeron G1840 supports 66.6% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The Celeron G1840 supports up to 32 GB of RAM compared to 16 GB — 100% more capacity for professional workloads. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. PCIe lanes: 0 (Athlon 64 FX-72) vs 16 (Celeron G1840) — the Celeron G1840 offers 16 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: AMD F (1207) (Athlon 64 FX-72) and H81,B85,H87,Z87,H97,Z97 (Celeron G1840).

Feature	Athlon 64 FX-72	Celeron G1840
Socket	F	LGA1150
PCIe Generation	PCIe 1.1	PCIe 3.0+173%
Max RAM Speed	DDR2-800	DDR3-1333+67%
Max RAM Capacity	16 GB	32 GB+100%
RAM Channels	2	2
ECC Support	No	Yes
PCIe Lanes	0	16

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization: not specified (Athlon 64 FX-72) / VT-x (Celeron G1840). The Celeron G1840 includes integrated graphics (HD Graphics (Haswell)), while the Athlon 64 FX-72 requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Celeron G1840 targets Budget. Direct competitor: Celeron G1840 rivals Pentium G3240.

Feature	Athlon 64 FX-72	Celeron G1840
Integrated GPU	No	Yes
IGPU Model	—	HD Graphics (Haswell)
Unlocked	—	No
AVX-512	—	No
Virtualization	—	VT-x
Target Use	—	Budget

💰

Value Analysis

At launch, the Athlon 64 FX-72 was priced at $799, while the Celeron G1840 came in at $35. On launch pricing ($799 vs $35), Celeron G1840 was $764 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Athlon 64 FX-72 delivers 2.2 pts/$ vs 51.0 pts/$ for the Celeron G1840 — making the Celeron G1840 the 183.1% better value option.

Feature	Athlon 64 FX-72	Celeron G1840
MSRP	$799	$35-96%
Performance per Dollar	2.2	51.0+2218%
Release Date	2006	2014

Search Athlon 64 FX-72 on Amazon

Search Celeron G1840 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.