Athlon II X2 245 vs Celeron N3350

Athlon II X2 245 vs Celeron N3350 Performance Spectrum

Athlon II X2 245

2 / 2

1,134

+2.0%

Mobile Athlon 64 3700+

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3955WX

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7955WX

Ryzen Threadripper 3990X

Celeron N3350

2 / 2

1,112

0.0%

Pentium D 830

Pentium T2370

Pentium T3400

Pentium Dual-Core E2200

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.

Athlon II X2 245 vs Celeron N3350 FPS Benchmarks

Predicted gaming performance across popular games. Tested paired with GeForce RTX 5090 to isolate CPU performance.

Search any supported game below to compare 1080p FPS for both components.

Athlon II X2 245 vs Celeron N3350: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

See where each CPU makes more sense in practice: gaming, heavier work, platform cost, power draw, and upgrade path.

Athlon II X2 245

2009

Why buy it

✅Costs $41 less on MSRP ($66 MSRP vs $107 MSRP).
✅Delivers 65.3% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 17.2 vs 10.4 PassMark/$ ($66 MSRP vs $107 MSRP).
✅Includes a boxed cooler (true), unlike Celeron N3350.

Trade-offs

❌983.3% higher power demand at 65W vs 6W.
❌No integrated graphics, while Celeron N3350 can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Celeron N3350

2016

Why buy it

✅Draws 6W instead of 65W, a 59W reduction.
✅100+% more PCIe lanes (6 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with Intel HD Graphics 500, while Athlon II X2 245 needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (1,112 vs 1,134).
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 10.4 vs 17.2 PassMark/$ ($107 MSRP vs $66 MSRP).
❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Athlon II X2 245.

Quick Answers

So, is Athlon II X2 245 better than Celeron N3350?

Yes. Athlon II X2 245 is the better all-around CPU here. It gives you 2% better PassMark, which is enough to make it the stronger overall pick.

Which one is better for gaming?

If gaming is the priority, Athlon II X2 245 has the edge because it leads the single-thread side of this matchup with 20.8% higher max boost clock.

Which one is better for streaming, content creation, and heavy multitasking?

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Athlon II X2 245 is the stronger fit. You are getting 2% better PassMark, backed by 2 cores and 2 threads.

Which one is the smarter buy today, not just the cheaper CPU?

Athlon II X2 245 is the better buy right now. Athlon II X2 245 comes in $41 cheaper on MSRP at $66 MSRP versus $107 MSRP, and it still gives you 2.0% higher PassMark. It is also 65.3% better value on MSRP (17.2 vs 10.4 PassMark/$), so you are getting the faster CPU without taking a value hit on paper.

Which one is more future-proof for 2026 and beyond?

Celeron N3350 makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2016 vs 2009). That makes it the safer long-term bet.

Athlon II X2 245 vs Celeron N3350 Technical Specifications

Side-by-side specs, architecture details, clocks, memory, power, and platform differences.

Athlon II X2 245

The Athlon II X2 245 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 23 July 2009 (16 years ago). It is based on the Regor (2009−2013) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 2.9 GHz, with boost up to 2.9 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 2 MB. Built on 45 nm process technology. Socket: AM3. Thermal design power (TDP): 65 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 1,134 points. Launch price was $35.

Celeron N3350

The Celeron N3350 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 30 August 2016 (9 years ago). It is based on the Apollo Lake (2014−2016) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 1.1 GHz, with boost up to 2.4 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 1 MB. Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: FCBGA1296. Thermal design power (TDP): 6 Watt. Memory support: DDR3, DDR4. Passmark benchmark score: 1,112 points. Launch price was $24.

⚡

Processing Power

Both the Athlon II X2 245 and Celeron N3350 share an identical 2-core/2-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 2.9 GHz on the Athlon II X2 245 versus 2.4 GHz on the Celeron N3350 — a 18.9% clock advantage for the Athlon II X2 245 (base: 2.9 GHz vs 1.1 GHz). The Athlon II X2 245 uses the Regor (2009−2013) architecture (45 nm), while the Celeron N3350 uses Apollo Lake (2014−2016) (14 nm). In PassMark, the Athlon II X2 245 scores 1,134 against the Celeron N3350's 1,112 — a 2% lead for the Athlon II X2 245. Both processors carry 0 kB of L3 cache.

Feature	Athlon II X2 245	Celeron N3350
Cores / Threads	2 / 2	2 / 2
Boost Clock	2.9 GHz+21%	2.4 GHz
Base Clock	2.9 GHz+164%	1.1 GHz
L3 Cache	0 kB	0 kB
L2 Cache	2 MB+100%	1 MB
Process	45 nm	14 nm-69%
Architecture	Regor (2009−2013)	Apollo Lake (2014−2016)
PassMark	1,134+2%	1,112
Geekbench 6 Single	—	250
Geekbench 6 Multi	—	450

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Athlon II X2 245 uses the AM3 socket (PCIe 2.0), while the Celeron N3350 uses FCBGA1296 (PCIe 3.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches 1333 on the Athlon II X2 245 versus LPDDR4-2400 on the Celeron N3350 — the Celeron N3350 supports 80% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The Athlon II X2 245 supports up to 16 GB of RAM compared to 8 GB — 100% more capacity for professional workloads. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. PCIe lanes: 0 (Athlon II X2 245) vs 6 (Celeron N3350) — the Celeron N3350 offers 6 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: AM2+,AM3 (Athlon II X2 245) and SoC (Celeron N3350).

Feature	Athlon II X2 245	Celeron N3350
Socket	AM3	FCBGA1296
PCIe Generation	PCIe 2.0	PCIe 3.0+50%
Max RAM Speed	1333	LPDDR4-2400+80%
Max RAM Capacity	16 GB+100%	8 GB
RAM Channels	2	2
ECC Support	No	No
PCIe Lanes	0	6

🔧

Advanced Features

Neither processor supports overclocking. Virtualization support: true (Athlon II X2 245) vs VT-x, VT-d, EPT (Celeron N3350). The Celeron N3350 includes integrated graphics (Intel HD Graphics 500), while the Athlon II X2 245 requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Celeron N3350 targets Entry Level Laptop/NUC. Direct competitor: Athlon II X2 245 rivals Pentium E5500; Celeron N3350 rivals AMD A4-9120.

Feature	Athlon II X2 245	Celeron N3350
Integrated GPU	No	Yes
IGPU Model	None	Intel HD Graphics 500
Unlocked	No	No
AVX-512	No	No
Virtualization	true	VT-x, VT-d, EPT
Target Use	—	Entry Level Laptop/NUC

💰

Value Analysis

At launch, the Athlon II X2 245 was priced at $66, while the Celeron N3350 came in at $107. On launch pricing ($66 vs $107), Athlon II X2 245 was $41 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Athlon II X2 245 delivers 17.2 pts/$ vs 10.4 pts/$ for the Celeron N3350 — making the Athlon II X2 245 the 49.2% better value option.

Feature	Athlon II X2 245	Celeron N3350
MSRP	$66-38%	$107
Performance per Dollar	17.2+65%	10.4
Release Date	2009	2016

Search Athlon II X2 245 on Amazon

Search Celeron N3350 on Amazon

Affiliate Disclosure

ChipVERSUS is a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to Amazon.com. We may earn a commission on qualifying purchases made through our links. This comes at no additional cost to you and helps support our work in providing comprehensive PC building guides and tools.

Amazon and the Amazon logo are trademarks of Amazon.com, Inc. or its affiliates.