
Athlon II Neo K145 vs Celeron SU2300

Athlon II Neo K145

Celeron SU2300
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 Neo K145 is positioned at rank 1048 and the Celeron SU2300 is on rank 1223, so the Athlon II Neo K145 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 Neo K145
Performance Per Dollar Celeron SU2300
Performance Comparison
About PassMark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
| Insight | Athlon II Neo K145 | Celeron SU2300 |
|---|---|---|
| Gaming | ✅ Superior gaming performance | ❌ Lower gaming performance |
| Workstation | ✅ Better multi-core power | ❌ Weaker in multi-core tasks |
| Price | ✅ More affordable ($10) | ⚠️ Higher cost ($134) |
| Longevity | 🛑 Legacy (Nile (2010) / 45 nm) | 🛑 Legacy (Legacy / 45 nm) |
💎 Value Proposition
| Insight | Athlon II Neo K145 | Celeron SU2300 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ✅ Better overall value (+1289%) | ❌ Lower cost efficiency |
| Upfront Cost | ✅ More affordable ($10) | ⚠️ Higher cost ($134) |
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 II Neo K145 and Celeron SU2300

Athlon II Neo K145
The Athlon II Neo K145 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 2009-01-01. It is based on the Nile (2010) architecture. It features 1 cores and 1 threads. Max frequency: 1.8 GHz. L2 cache: 1 MB. Built on 45 nm process technology. Socket: S1. Thermal design power (TDP): 1 MB. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 565 points. Launch price was $149.

Celeron SU2300
The Celeron SU2300 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 2007-01-01. Base frequency: 1.2 GHz. L3 cache: 1 MB. Built on 45 nm process technology. Socket: BGA956. Thermal design power (TDP): 10 Watt. Passmark benchmark score: 545 points. Launch price was $69.
Processing Power
The Athlon II Neo K145 is built on the Nile (2010) architecture. In PassMark, the Athlon II Neo K145 scores 565 against the Celeron SU2300's 545 — a 3.6% lead for the Athlon II Neo K145.
| Feature | Athlon II Neo K145 | Celeron SU2300 |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 1 / 1 | — |
| Boost Clock | 1.8 GHz | — |
| Base Clock | — | 1.2 GHz |
| L3 Cache | — | 1 MB |
| L2 Cache | 1 MB | — |
| Process | 45 nm | 45 nm |
| Architecture | Nile (2010) | — |
| PassMark | 565+4% | 545 |
Memory & Platform
The Athlon II Neo K145 uses the S1 socket (PCIe 2.0), while the Celeron SU2300 uses BGA956 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.
| Feature | Athlon II Neo K145 | Celeron SU2300 |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | S1 | BGA956 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 2.0 | PCIe 2.0 |
| Max RAM Speed | DDR3-1066 | — |
| Max RAM Capacity | 4 GB | — |
| RAM Channels | 2 | — |
| ECC Support | ❌ | — |
| PCIe Lanes | 0 | — |
Value Analysis
The Athlon II Neo K145 launched at $50 MSRP, while the Celeron SU2300 debuted at $134. At current prices ($10 vs $134), the Athlon II Neo K145 is $124 cheaper. In terms of value (PassMark points per dollar), the Athlon II Neo K145 delivers 56.5 pts/$ vs 4.1 pts/$ for the Celeron SU2300 — making the Athlon II Neo K145 the 173.1% better value option.
| Feature | Athlon II Neo K145 | Celeron SU2300 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $50-63% | $134 |
| Avg Price (30d) | $10-93% | $134 |
| Performance per Dollar | 56.5+1278% | 4.1 |
| Release Date | 2010 | 2009 |
Top Performing CPUs
The most powerful cpus ranked by PassMark CPU Mark benchmark scores.
















