Athlon II M320 vs Celeron Dual-Core T3000
Athlon II M320
Celeron Dual-Core T3000
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 II M320 is positioned at rank 809 and the Celeron Dual-Core T3000 is on rank 824, so the Athlon II M320 offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar Athlon II M320
Performance Per Dollar Celeron Dual-Core T3000
Performance Comparison
About PassMark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
| Insight | Athlon II M320 | Celeron Dual-Core T3000 |
|---|---|---|
| Gaming | ✅ Superior gaming performance | ❌ Lower gaming performance |
| Workstation | ❌ Weaker in multi-core tasks | ✅ Better multi-core power |
| Price | Equivalent pricing | Equivalent pricing |
| Longevity | 🛑 Legacy (Caspian (2009) / 45 nm) | 🛑 Legacy (Penryn-1M (2009) / 45 nm) |
💎 Value Proposition
| Insight | Athlon II M320 | Celeron Dual-Core T3000 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ❌ Lower cost efficiency | ✅ Better overall value (+0%) |
| Upfront Cost | Equivalent pricing | Equivalent pricing |
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.
Counter-Strike 2
Valorant
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of Athlon II M320 and Celeron Dual-Core T3000
Athlon II M320
The Athlon II M320 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 2009-01-01. It is based on the Caspian (2009) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Max frequency: 2.1 GHz. L2 cache: 1 MB. Built on 45 nm process technology. Socket: S1g3. Thermal design power (TDP): 1 MB. Memory support: DDR2. Passmark benchmark score: 1,795 points. Launch price was $149.
Celeron Dual-Core T3000
The Celeron Dual-Core T3000 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 2007-01-01. It is based on the Penryn-1M (2009) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Max frequency: 1.8 GHz. L2 cache: 1 MB. Built on 45 nm process technology. Socket: P. Thermal design power (TDP): 1 MB. Passmark benchmark score: 1,797 points. Launch price was $69.
Processing Power
Both the Athlon II M320 and Celeron Dual-Core T3000 share an identical 2-core/2-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 2.1 GHz on the Athlon II M320 versus 1.8 GHz on the Celeron Dual-Core T3000 — a 15.4% clock advantage for the Athlon II M320. The Athlon II M320 uses the Caspian (2009) architecture (45 nm), while the Celeron Dual-Core T3000 uses Penryn-1M (2009) (45 nm). In PassMark, the Athlon II M320 scores 1,795 against the Celeron Dual-Core T3000's 1,797 — a 0.1% lead for the Celeron Dual-Core T3000.
| Feature | Athlon II M320 | Celeron Dual-Core T3000 |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 2 / 2 | 2 / 2 |
| Boost Clock | 2.1 GHz+17% | 1.8 GHz |
| L2 Cache | 1 MB | 1 MB |
| Process | 45 nm | 45 nm |
| Architecture | Caspian (2009) | Penryn-1M (2009) |
| PassMark | 1,795 | 1,797 |
| Geekbench 6 Single | 188 | — |
| Geekbench 6 Multi | 1,955 | — |
Memory & Platform
The Athlon II M320 uses the S1g3 socket (PCIe 2.0), while the Celeron Dual-Core T3000 uses P (PCIe 1.1) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR2-800 on the Athlon II M320 versus DDR3-800 on the Celeron Dual-Core T3000 — the Celeron Dual-Core T3000 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 II M320) vs 16 (Celeron Dual-Core T3000) — the Celeron Dual-Core T3000 offers 16 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: Socket S1g3 (Athlon II M320) and Mobile Intel 4 Series (Celeron Dual-Core T3000).
| Feature | Athlon II M320 | Celeron Dual-Core T3000 |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | S1g3 | P |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 2.0+82% | PCIe 1.1 |
| Max RAM Speed | DDR2-800 | DDR3-800+50% |
| Max RAM Capacity | 8 GB | 8 GB |
| RAM Channels | 2 | 2 |
| ECC Support | ❌ | ❌ |
| PCIe Lanes | 0 | 16 |
Advanced Features
Neither processor supports overclocking. Virtualization support: AMD-V (Athlon II M320) vs false (Celeron Dual-Core T3000). Primary use case: Athlon II M320 targets Legacy Laptop. Direct competitor: Athlon II M320 rivals Core 2 Duo T6400.
| Feature | Athlon II M320 | Celeron Dual-Core T3000 |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | No | No |
| IGPU Model | None | — |
| Unlocked | No | No |
| AVX-512 | No | No |
| Virtualization | AMD-V | false |
| Target Use | Legacy Laptop | — |
Value Analysis
The Athlon II M320 launched at $75 MSRP, while the Celeron Dual-Core T3000 debuted at $80. At current prices ($15 vs $15), the Celeron Dual-Core T3000 is $0 cheaper. In terms of value (PassMark points per dollar), the Athlon II M320 delivers 119.7 pts/$ vs 119.8 pts/$ for the Celeron Dual-Core T3000 — making the Celeron Dual-Core T3000 the 0.1% better value option.
| Feature | Athlon II M320 | Celeron Dual-Core T3000 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $75-6% | $80 |
| Avg Price (30d) | $15 | $15 |
| Performance per Dollar | 119.7 | 119.8 |
| Release Date | 2009 | 2009 |
Top Performing CPUs
The most powerful cpus ranked by PassMark CPU Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar CPU comparisons based on Athlon II M320 and Celeron Dual-Core T3000
