Athlon 64 X2 5000+ vs Celeron N2805
Athlon 64 X2 5000+
Celeron N2805
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 X2 5000+ is positioned at rank 988 and the Celeron N2805 is on rank 250, so the Celeron N2805 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 X2 5000+
Performance Per Dollar Celeron N2805
Performance Comparison
About PassMark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
| Insight | Athlon 64 X2 5000+ | Celeron N2805 |
|---|---|---|
| Gaming | ✅ Superior gaming performance | ❌ Lower gaming performance |
| Workstation | ❌ Weaker in multi-core tasks | ✅ Better multi-core power |
| Price | ⚠️ Higher cost ($42) | ✅ More affordable ($0) |
| Longevity | 🛑 Legacy (Windsor (2006−2007) / 90 nm) | 🛑 Legacy (Bay Trail-M (2013−2014) / 22 nm) |
💎 Value Proposition
| Insight | Athlon 64 X2 5000+ | Celeron N2805 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ❌ Lower cost efficiency | ❌ Lower cost efficiency |
| Upfront Cost | ⚠️ Higher cost ($42) | ✅ More affordable ($0) |
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 X2 5000+ and Celeron N2805
Athlon 64 X2 5000+
The Athlon 64 X2 5000+ 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: 2.6 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 512 kB. Built on 90 nm process technology. Socket: AM2. Thermal design power (TDP): 89 Watt. Passmark benchmark score: 1,425 points. Launch price was $149.
Celeron N2805
The Celeron N2805 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 11 September 2013 (12 years ago). It is based on the Bay Trail-M (2013−2014) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 1.46 GHz, with boost up to 1.46 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 512K (per core). Built on 22 nm process technology. Socket: FCBGA1170. Thermal design power (TDP): 4.3 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 1,430 points. Launch price was $107.
Processing Power
Both the Athlon 64 X2 5000+ and Celeron N2805 share an identical 2-core/2-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 2.6 GHz on the Athlon 64 X2 5000+ versus 1.46 GHz on the Celeron N2805 — a 56.2% clock advantage for the Athlon 64 X2 5000+. The Athlon 64 X2 5000+ uses the Windsor (2006−2007) architecture (90 nm), while the Celeron N2805 uses Bay Trail-M (2013−2014) (22 nm). In PassMark, the Athlon 64 X2 5000+ scores 1,425 against the Celeron N2805's 1,430 — a 0.4% lead for the Celeron N2805. Both processors carry 0 kB of L3 cache.
| Feature | Athlon 64 X2 5000+ | Celeron N2805 |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 2 / 2 | 2 / 2 |
| Boost Clock | 2.6 GHz+78% | 1.46 GHz |
| Base Clock | — | 1.46 GHz |
| L3 Cache | 0 kB | 0 kB |
| L2 Cache | 512 kB | 512K (per core) |
| Process | 90 nm | 22 nm-76% |
| Architecture | Windsor (2006−2007) | Bay Trail-M (2013−2014) |
| PassMark | 1,425 | 1,430 |
Memory & Platform
The Athlon 64 X2 5000+ uses the AM2 socket (PCIe 1.1), while the Celeron N2805 uses FCBGA1170 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR2-800 on the Athlon 64 X2 5000+ versus 1066 on the Celeron N2805 — the Celeron N2805 supports 199.3% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The Athlon 64 X2 5000+ supports up to 16 GB of RAM compared to 4 — 120% more capacity for professional workloads. Memory channels: 2 (Athlon 64 X2 5000+) vs 1 (Celeron N2805). PCIe lanes: 0 (Athlon 64 X2 5000+) vs 4 (Celeron N2805) — the Celeron N2805 offers 4 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: AMD AM2 (Athlon 64 X2 5000+) and FCBGA1170 (Celeron N2805).
| Feature | Athlon 64 X2 5000+ | Celeron N2805 |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | AM2 | FCBGA1170 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 1.1 | PCIe 2.0+82% |
| Max RAM Speed | DDR2-800 | 1066+53200% |
| Max RAM Capacity | 16 GB+419430300% | 4 |
| RAM Channels | 2+100% | 1 |
| ECC Support | ❌ | ❌ |
| PCIe Lanes | 0 | 4 |
Advanced Features
Virtualization: not specified (Athlon 64 X2 5000+) / true (Celeron N2805). The Celeron N2805 includes integrated graphics (Intel HD Graphics (Bay Trail)), while the Athlon 64 X2 5000+ requires a dedicated GPU. Direct competitor: Celeron N2805 rivals AMD E1-2100.
| Feature | Athlon 64 X2 5000+ | Celeron N2805 |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | No | Yes |
| IGPU Model | — | Intel HD Graphics (Bay Trail) |
| Unlocked | — | No |
| AVX-512 | — | No |
| Virtualization | — | true |
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 X2 5000+ and Celeron N2805
