Athlon 64 X2 5800+
VS
Celeron 3965U

Athlon 64 X2 5800+ vs Celeron 3965U

AMD

Athlon 64 X2 5800+

2 Cores2 Thrd89 WWMax: 3 GHz2008
VS
Intel

Celeron 3965U

2 Cores2 Thrd15 WWMax: 2.2 GHz2017

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 5800+ is positioned at rank 1037 and the Celeron 3965U is on rank 265, so the Celeron 3965U 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 X2 5800+

#1
Ryzen 9 7950X
MSRP: $194|Avg: $20
41069%
#2
Core i9-10900T
MSRP: $120|Avg: $5
38806%
#3
Ryzen 3 PRO 4355GE
MSRP: $423|Avg: $5
28177%
#4
Ryzen Threadripper 3960X
MSRP: $1399|Avg: $85
8488%
#5
Ryzen 9 9950X
MSRP: $649|Avg: $129
6724%
#6
Ryzen 5 8400F
MSRP: $303|Avg: $55
5882%
#7
Ryzen 7 PRO 2700
MSRP: $299|Avg: $60
3369%
#8
Ryzen 5 2600X
MSRP: $229|Avg: $55
3325%
#9
Ryzen 3 PRO 5350G
MSRP: $150|Avg: $60
3027%
#10
Core Ultra 5 245KF
MSRP: $294|Avg: $189
3027%
#11
Ryzen 5 5500
MSRP: $159|Avg: $85
2993%
#12
Ryzen 5 3600
MSRP: $199|Avg: $80
2913%
#13
Core i3-9100E
MSRP: $202|Avg: $30
2872%
#14
Core Ultra 5 245K
MSRP: $319|Avg: $200
2860%
#15
Core i3-8300T
MSRP: $138|Avg: $25
2834%
#1037
Athlon 64 X2 5800+
MSRP: $230|Avg: $20
100%
#1038
Phenom II X2 B53
MSRP: $150|Avg: $15
100%
#1039
Core 2 Quad Q9300
MSRP: $266|Avg: $27
100%
#1040
Athlon II X4 638
MSRP: $300|Avg: $280
99%
#1041
Core 2 Duo E7200
MSRP: $133|Avg: $133
99%
#1043
Phenom X3 8750
MSRP: $195|Avg: $20
98%
#1044
Pentium G4400TE
MSRP: $300|Avg: $250
96%
#1045
Celeron 2.60
MSRP: $53|Avg: $10
96%
#1046
Core i7-990X
MSRP: $999|Avg: $225
94%
#1047
Phenom X4 9750B
MSRP: $215|Avg: $34
93%
#1048
Core 2 Duo E8200
MSRP: $163|Avg: $20
92%
#1049
Core 2 Quad Q9450
MSRP: $316|Avg: $15
92%
#1050
Core 2 Duo E8600
MSRP: $200|Avg: $95
91%
#1051
Core 2 Duo E6320
MSRP: $163|Avg: $5
90%
#1052
Core i7-980X
MSRP: $999|Avg: $150
90%
Based on actual market prices and performance synthetic scores.

Performance Per Dollar Celeron 3965U

#73
Core i9-13950HX
MSRP: $590|Avg: $199
99%
#253
Atom x5-Z8300
MSRP: $20|Avg: N/A
418%
#254
Atom Z3735G
MSRP: $17|Avg: N/A
412%
#255
Core i5-480M
MSRP: $81|Avg: $77
378%
#256
Core i5-460M
MSRP: $80|Avg: $129
377%
#257
Core i5-2540M
MSRP: $266|Avg: $10
373%
#259
Core i5-450M
MSRP: $32|Avg: $31
361%
#260
Core i3-380M
MSRP: $49|Avg: $25
346%
#261
Core i5-430M
MSRP: N/A|Avg: $33
345%
#262
Core 2 Duo T6600
MSRP: N/A|Avg: $4
336%
#265
Celeron 3965U
MSRP: N/A|Avg: N/A
100%
#277
Core 2 Extreme X9100
MSRP: $851|Avg: N/A
98%
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 3965U (2017) utilizes 14 nm technology and DDR3, DDR4, providing a fundamental performance advantage.
InsightAthlon 64 X2 5800+Celeron 3965U
Gaming
Superior gaming performance
Lower gaming performance
Workstation
Weaker in multi-core tasks
Better multi-core power
Price
⚠️ Higher cost ($20)
More affordable ($0)
Longevity
🛑 Legacy (Brisbane (2007−2008) / 65 nm)
✨ Modern (Kaby Lake-U (2017) / 14 nm)

💎 Value Proposition

The Athlon 64 X2 5800+ (2008) relies on 65 nm technology and older memory, placing it in a different performance category relative to modern standards.
InsightAthlon 64 X2 5800+Celeron 3965U
Cost Efficiency
Lower cost efficiency
Lower cost efficiency
Upfront Cost
⚠️ Higher cost ($20)
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 X2 5800+ and Celeron 3965U

AMD

Athlon 64 X2 5800+

The Athlon 64 X2 5800+ is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 2009-01-01. It is based on the Brisbane (2007−2008) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Max frequency: 3 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 512 kB. Built on 65 nm process technology. Socket: AM2. Thermal design power (TDP): 89 Watt. Passmark benchmark score: 1,745 points. Launch price was $149.

Intel

Celeron 3965U

The Celeron 3965U is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 3 January 2017 (8 years ago). It is based on the Kaby Lake-U (2017) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 2.2 GHz, with boost up to 2.2 GHz. L3 cache: 2 MB (total). L2 cache: 256K (per core). Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: BGA1356. Thermal design power (TDP): 15 Watt. Memory support: DDR3, DDR4. Passmark benchmark score: 1,753 points. Launch price was $107.

Processing Power

Both the Athlon 64 X2 5800+ and Celeron 3965U share an identical 2-core/2-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 3 GHz on the Athlon 64 X2 5800+ versus 2.2 GHz on the Celeron 3965U — a 30.8% clock advantage for the Athlon 64 X2 5800+. The Athlon 64 X2 5800+ uses the Brisbane (2007−2008) architecture (65 nm), while the Celeron 3965U uses Kaby Lake-U (2017) (14 nm). In PassMark, the Athlon 64 X2 5800+ scores 1,745 against the Celeron 3965U's 1,753 — a 0.5% lead for the Celeron 3965U. L3 cache: 0 kB on the Athlon 64 X2 5800+ vs 2 MB (total) on the Celeron 3965U.

FeatureAthlon 64 X2 5800+Celeron 3965U
Cores / Threads
2 / 2
2 / 2
Boost Clock
3 GHz+36%
2.2 GHz
Base Clock
2.2 GHz
L3 Cache
0 kB
2 MB (total)
L2 Cache
512 kB+100%
256K (per core)
Process
65 nm
14 nm-78%
Architecture
Brisbane (2007−2008)
Kaby Lake-U (2017)
PassMark
1,745
1,753
Geekbench 6 Single
600
Geekbench 6 Multi
1,200
🧠

Memory & Platform

The Athlon 64 X2 5800+ uses the AM2 socket (PCIe 2.0), while the Celeron 3965U uses BGA1356 (PCIe 3.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR2-800 on the Athlon 64 X2 5800+ versus DDR4-2133 on the Celeron 3965U — the Celeron 3965U supports 66.7% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The Celeron 3965U supports up to 32 GB of RAM compared to 16 GB 66.7% more capacity for professional workloads. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. PCIe lanes: 0 (Athlon 64 X2 5800+) vs 10 (Celeron 3965U) — the Celeron 3965U offers 10 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: AMD AM2 (Athlon 64 X2 5800+) and SoC (Celeron 3965U).

FeatureAthlon 64 X2 5800+Celeron 3965U
Socket
AM2
BGA1356
PCIe Generation
PCIe 2.0
PCIe 3.0+50%
Max RAM Speed
DDR2-800
DDR4-2133+100%
Max RAM Capacity
16 GB
32 GB+100%
RAM Channels
2
2
ECC Support
PCIe Lanes
0
10
🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization: not specified (Athlon 64 X2 5800+) / VT-x (Celeron 3965U). The Celeron 3965U includes integrated graphics (Intel HD Graphics 610), while the Athlon 64 X2 5800+ requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Celeron 3965U targets Budget Laptop. Direct competitor: Celeron 3965U rivals Pentium Gold 4415U.

FeatureAthlon 64 X2 5800+Celeron 3965U
Integrated GPU
No
Yes
IGPU Model
Intel HD Graphics 610
Unlocked
No
AVX-512
No
Virtualization
VT-x
Target Use
Budget Laptop