Athlon 64 TF-20
VS
Celeron J3160

Athlon 64 TF-20 vs Celeron J3160

AMD

Athlon 64 TF-20

1 Cores1 Thrd512 WWMax: 1.6 GHz2009
VS
Intel

Celeron J3160

4 Cores4 Thrd6 WWMax: 2.24 GHz2016

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 TF-20 is positioned at rank 790 and the Celeron J3160 is on rank 485, so the Celeron J3160 offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.

MSRP is the manufacturer's suggested retail price.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.

Performance Per Dollar Athlon 64 TF-20

#778
Atom x5-Z8300
MSRP: $20|Avg: N/A
1178%
#779
Atom Z3735G
MSRP: $17|Avg: N/A
1161%
#780
Core i5-480M
MSRP: $81|Avg: $77
1066%
#781
Core i5-460M
MSRP: $80|Avg: $129
1061%
#782
Core i5-2540M
MSRP: $266|Avg: $10
1051%
#784
Core i5-450M
MSRP: $32|Avg: $31
1015%
#785
Core i3-380M
MSRP: $49|Avg: $25
973%
#786
Core i5-430M
MSRP: N/A|Avg: $33
972%
#787
Core 2 Duo T6600
MSRP: N/A|Avg: $4
946%
#790
Athlon 64 TF-20
MSRP: $50|Avg: $10
100%
#795
Core i3-1115G4E
MSRP: $213|Avg: $47
99%
#797
Celeron M 900
MSRP: $86|Avg: $10
98%
#800
Celeron B815
MSRP: $86|Avg: $15
98%
#801
Celeron B810
MSRP: $86|Avg: $86
98%
#803
Core i7-1365UE
MSRP: $429|Avg: $429
97%
#805
3020e
MSRP: $100|Avg: $25
97%
Based on actual market prices and performance synthetic scores.

Performance Per Dollar Celeron J3160

#1
Ryzen 9 7950X
MSRP: $194|Avg: $20
7481%
#2
Core i9-10900T
MSRP: $120|Avg: $5
7068%
#3
Ryzen 3 PRO 4355GE
MSRP: $423|Avg: $5
5132%
#4
Ryzen Threadripper 3960X
MSRP: $1399|Avg: $85
1546%
#5
Ryzen 9 9950X
MSRP: $649|Avg: $129
1225%
#6
Ryzen 5 8400F
MSRP: $303|Avg: $55
1071%
#7
Ryzen 7 PRO 2700
MSRP: $299|Avg: $60
614%
#8
Ryzen 5 2600X
MSRP: $229|Avg: $55
606%
#9
Ryzen 3 PRO 5350G
MSRP: $150|Avg: $60
551%
#10
Core Ultra 5 245KF
MSRP: $294|Avg: $189
551%
#11
Ryzen 5 5500
MSRP: $159|Avg: $85
545%
#12
Ryzen 5 3600
MSRP: $199|Avg: $80
531%
#13
Core i3-9100E
MSRP: $202|Avg: $30
523%
#14
Core Ultra 5 245K
MSRP: $319|Avg: $200
521%
#15
Core i3-8300T
MSRP: $138|Avg: $25
516%
#369
Core i5-8400T
MSRP: $182|Avg: $179
100%
#370
Athlon 240GE
MSRP: $75|Avg: $110
99%
#485
Celeron J3160
MSRP: N/A|Avg: N/A
100%
#487
Pentium Dual-Core E2220
MSRP: $32|Avg: $32
100%
#491
Pentium G4600T
MSRP: $75|Avg: $35
98%
#493
Core i5-6500T
MSRP: $117|Avg: $35
98%
#494
FX-6330
MSRP: $109|Avg: $25
98%
#495
Celeron G1630
MSRP: $42|Avg: $5
98%
#499
Pentium G4400
MSRP: $64|Avg: $85
96%
Based on actual market prices and performance synthetic scores.

Performance Comparison

About PassMark

🏆 Chipversus Verdict

🚀 Performance Leadership

Generational Difference: This comparison involves processors from different technological eras. The Celeron J3160 (2016) utilizes 14 nm technology and DDR3L-1600, providing a fundamental performance advantage.
InsightAthlon 64 TF-20Celeron J3160
Gaming
Lower gaming performance
Superior gaming performance
Workstation
Weaker in multi-core tasks
Better multi-core power
Price
⚠️ Higher cost ($10)
More affordable ($0)
Longevity
🛑 Legacy (Sherman (2009) / 65 nm)
🛑 Legacy (Airmont (2016) / 14 nm)

💎 Value Proposition

The Athlon 64 TF-20 (2009) relies on 65 nm technology and older memory, placing it in a different performance category relative to modern standards.
InsightAthlon 64 TF-20Celeron J3160
Cost Efficiency
Lower cost efficiency
Lower cost efficiency
Upfront Cost
⚠️ Higher cost ($10)
More affordable ($0)

Performance Check

Paired with RTX 4090

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 TF-20 and Celeron J3160

AMD

Athlon 64 TF-20

The Athlon 64 TF-20 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 2009-01-01. It is based on the Sherman (2009) architecture. It features 1 cores and 1 threads. Max frequency: 1.6 GHz. L2 cache: 512 kB. Built on 65 nm process technology. Socket: S1g1. Thermal design power (TDP): 512 kB. Passmark benchmark score: 1,245 points. Launch price was $149.

Intel

Celeron J3160

The Celeron J3160 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 15 January 2016 (9 years ago). It is based on the Airmont (2016) architecture. It features 4 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 1.6 GHz, with boost up to 2.24 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 2 MB. Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: FCBGA1170. Thermal design power (TDP): 6 Watt. Memory support: DDR3L-1600. Passmark benchmark score: 1,250 points. Launch price was $107.

Processing Power

The Athlon 64 TF-20 packs 1 cores / 1 threads, while the Celeron J3160 offers 4 cores / 4 threads — the Celeron J3160 has 3 more cores. Boost clocks reach 1.6 GHz on the Athlon 64 TF-20 versus 2.24 GHz on the Celeron J3160 — a 33.3% clock advantage for the Celeron J3160. The Athlon 64 TF-20 uses the Sherman (2009) architecture (65 nm), while the Celeron J3160 uses Airmont (2016) (14 nm). In PassMark, the Athlon 64 TF-20 scores 1,245 against the Celeron J3160's 1,250 — a 0.4% lead for the Celeron J3160.

FeatureAthlon 64 TF-20Celeron J3160
Cores / Threads
1 / 1
4 / 4+300%
Boost Clock
1.6 GHz
2.24 GHz+40%
Base Clock
1.6 GHz
L3 Cache
0 kB
L2 Cache
512 kB
2 MB+300%
Process
65 nm
14 nm-78%
Architecture
Sherman (2009)
Airmont (2016)
PassMark
1,245
1,250
Geekbench 6 Single
350
Geekbench 6 Multi
650
🧠

Memory & Platform

The Athlon 64 TF-20 uses the S1g1 socket (PCIe 2.0), while the Celeron J3160 uses FCBGA1170 (PCIe 3.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR2-667 on the Athlon 64 TF-20 versus DDR3L-1600 on the Celeron J3160 — the Celeron J3160 supports 40% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The Celeron J3160 supports up to 8 GB of RAM compared to 4 GB 66.7% more capacity for professional workloads. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. Chipset compatibility: Socket S1 (Athlon 64 TF-20) and N/A (SoC) (Celeron J3160).

FeatureAthlon 64 TF-20Celeron J3160
Socket
S1g1
FCBGA1170
PCIe Generation
PCIe 2.0
PCIe 3.0+50%
Max RAM Speed
DDR2-667
DDR3L-1600+50%
Max RAM Capacity
4 GB
8 GB+100%
RAM Channels
2
2
ECC Support
PCIe Lanes
4
🔧

Advanced Features

Neither processor supports overclocking. Virtualization support: false (Athlon 64 TF-20) vs VT-x (Celeron J3160). The Celeron J3160 includes integrated graphics (HD Graphics 400), while the Athlon 64 TF-20 requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Celeron J3160 targets Low Power. Direct competitor: Celeron J3160 rivals Pentium J3710.

FeatureAthlon 64 TF-20Celeron J3160
Integrated GPU
No
Yes
IGPU Model
HD Graphics 400
Unlocked
No
No
AVX-512
No
No
Virtualization
false
VT-x
Target Use
Low Power