Athlon 64 X2 TK-42 vs Celeron J1800
Athlon 64 X2 TK-42
Celeron J1800
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 TK-42 is positioned at rank 1019 and the Celeron J1800 is on rank 750, so the Celeron J1800 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 TK-42
Performance Per Dollar Celeron J1800
Performance Comparison
About PassMark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
| Insight | Athlon 64 X2 TK-42 | Celeron J1800 |
|---|---|---|
| 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 (Tyler (2007−2009) / 65 nm) | 🛑 Legacy (Bay Trail-D (2013) / 22 nm) |
💎 Value Proposition
| Insight | Athlon 64 X2 TK-42 | Celeron J1800 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ❌ Lower cost efficiency | ❌ Lower cost efficiency |
| Upfront Cost | ⚠️ Higher cost ($10) | ✅ 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 TK-42 and Celeron J1800
Athlon 64 X2 TK-42
The Athlon 64 X2 TK-42 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 2009-01-01. It is based on the Tyler (2007−2009) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Max frequency: 1.6 GHz. L2 cache: 1 MB. Built on 65 nm process technology. Socket: S1. Thermal design power (TDP): 1 MB. Passmark benchmark score: 775 points. Launch price was $149.
Celeron J1800
The Celeron J1800 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 1 November 2013 (12 years ago). It is based on the Bay Trail-D (2013) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 2.41 GHz, with boost up to 2.58 GHz. L3 cache: 1 MB L2 Cache. L2 cache: 1 MB. Built on 22 nm process technology. Socket: FCBGA1170. Thermal design power (TDP): 10 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 820 points. Launch price was $72.
Processing Power
Both the Athlon 64 X2 TK-42 and Celeron J1800 share an identical 2-core/2-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 1.6 GHz on the Athlon 64 X2 TK-42 versus 2.58 GHz on the Celeron J1800 — a 46.9% clock advantage for the Celeron J1800. The Athlon 64 X2 TK-42 uses the Tyler (2007−2009) architecture (65 nm), while the Celeron J1800 uses Bay Trail-D (2013) (22 nm). In PassMark, the Athlon 64 X2 TK-42 scores 775 against the Celeron J1800's 820 — a 5.6% lead for the Celeron J1800.
| Feature | Athlon 64 X2 TK-42 | Celeron J1800 |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 2 / 2 | 2 / 2 |
| Boost Clock | 1.6 GHz | 2.58 GHz+61% |
| Base Clock | — | 2.41 GHz |
| L3 Cache | — | 1 MB L2 Cache |
| L2 Cache | 1 MB | 1 MB |
| Process | 65 nm | 22 nm-66% |
| Architecture | Tyler (2007−2009) | Bay Trail-D (2013) |
| PassMark | 775 | 820+6% |
| Geekbench 6 Single | — | 150 |
| Geekbench 6 Multi | — | 250 |
Memory & Platform
The Athlon 64 X2 TK-42 uses the S1 socket (PCIe 2.0), while the Celeron J1800 uses FCBGA1170 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR2-667 on the Athlon 64 X2 TK-42 versus DDR3L-1333 on the Celeron J1800 — the Celeron J1800 supports 40% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. Both support up to 8 GB of RAM. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. PCIe lanes: 0 (Athlon 64 X2 TK-42) vs 4 (Celeron J1800) — the Celeron J1800 offers 4 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: AMD S1 (Athlon 64 X2 TK-42) and N/A (SoC) (Celeron J1800).
| Feature | Athlon 64 X2 TK-42 | Celeron J1800 |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | S1 | FCBGA1170 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 2.0 | PCIe 2.0 |
| Max RAM Speed | DDR2-667 | DDR3L-1333+50% |
| Max RAM Capacity | 8 GB | 8 GB |
| RAM Channels | 2 | 2 |
| ECC Support | ❌ | ❌ |
| PCIe Lanes | 0 | 4 |
Advanced Features
Virtualization: not specified (Athlon 64 X2 TK-42) / VT-x (Celeron J1800). The Celeron J1800 includes integrated graphics (HD Graphics (Bay Trail)), while the Athlon 64 X2 TK-42 requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Celeron J1800 targets Low Power. Direct competitor: Celeron J1800 rivals Pentium J2850.
| Feature | Athlon 64 X2 TK-42 | Celeron J1800 |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | No | Yes |
| IGPU Model | — | HD Graphics (Bay Trail) |
| Unlocked | — | No |
| AVX-512 | — | No |
| Virtualization | — | VT-x |
| Target Use | — | Low Power |
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 TK-42 and Celeron J1800
