Athlon II Neo K345 vs Celeron N3160
Athlon II Neo K345
Celeron N3160
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 K345 is positioned at rank 812 and the Celeron N3160 is on rank 697, so the Celeron N3160 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 K345
Performance Per Dollar Celeron N3160
Performance Comparison
About PassMark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
| Insight | Athlon II Neo K345 | Celeron N3160 |
|---|---|---|
| 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 (Champlain (2010−2011) / 45 nm) | 🛑 Legacy (Braswell (2015−2016) / 14 nm) |
💎 Value Proposition
| Insight | Athlon II Neo K345 | Celeron N3160 |
|---|---|---|
| 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 II Neo K345 and Celeron N3160
Athlon II Neo K345
The Athlon II Neo K345 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 2009-01-01. It is based on the Champlain (2010−2011) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Max frequency: 1.4 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: 1,191 points. Launch price was $149.
Celeron N3160
The Celeron N3160 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 15 January 2016 (9 years ago). It is based on the Braswell (2015−2016) architecture. It features 4 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 1.6 GHz, with boost up to 2.24 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 2 MB. Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: FCBGA1170. Thermal design power (TDP): 6 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 1,195 points. Launch price was $107.
Processing Power
The Athlon II Neo K345 packs 2 cores / 2 threads, while the Celeron N3160 offers 4 cores / 4 threads — the Celeron N3160 has 2 more cores. Boost clocks reach 1.4 GHz on the Athlon II Neo K345 versus 2.24 GHz on the Celeron N3160 — a 46.2% clock advantage for the Celeron N3160. The Athlon II Neo K345 uses the Champlain (2010−2011) architecture (45 nm), while the Celeron N3160 uses Braswell (2015−2016) (14 nm). In PassMark, the Athlon II Neo K345 scores 1,191 against the Celeron N3160's 1,195 — a 0.3% lead for the Celeron N3160.
| Feature | Athlon II Neo K345 | Celeron N3160 |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 2 / 2 | 4 / 4+100% |
| Boost Clock | 1.4 GHz | 2.24 GHz+60% |
| Base Clock | — | 1.6 GHz |
| L3 Cache | — | 0 kB |
| L2 Cache | 1 MB | 2 MB+100% |
| Process | 45 nm | 14 nm-69% |
| Architecture | Champlain (2010−2011) | Braswell (2015−2016) |
| PassMark | 1,191 | 1,195 |
Memory & Platform
The Athlon II Neo K345 uses the S1 socket (PCIe 2.0), while the Celeron N3160 uses FCBGA1170 (PCIe 3.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR3-1066 on the Athlon II Neo K345 versus 1600 on the Celeron N3160 — the Celeron N3160 supports 199.3% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The Celeron N3160 supports up to 8 of RAM compared to 4 GB — 66.7% more capacity for professional workloads. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. PCIe lanes: 0 (Athlon II Neo K345) vs 4 (Celeron N3160) — the Celeron N3160 offers 4 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: AMD ASB2 (Athlon II Neo K345) and FCBGA1170 (Celeron N3160).
| Feature | Athlon II Neo K345 | Celeron N3160 |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | S1 | FCBGA1170 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 2.0 | PCIe 3.0+50% |
| Max RAM Speed | DDR3-1066 | 1600+53233% |
| Max RAM Capacity | 4 GB+52428700% | 8 |
| RAM Channels | 2 | 2 |
| ECC Support | ❌ | ❌ |
| PCIe Lanes | 0 | 4 |
Advanced Features
Virtualization: not specified (Athlon II Neo K345) / true (Celeron N3160). The Celeron N3160 includes integrated graphics (Intel HD Graphics 400), while the Athlon II Neo K345 requires a dedicated GPU. Direct competitor: Celeron N3160 rivals AMD E2-9010.
| Feature | Athlon II Neo K345 | Celeron N3160 |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | No | Yes |
| IGPU Model | — | Intel HD Graphics 400 |
| 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 II Neo K345 and Celeron N3160
