Athlon II X2 250 vs Celeron 3215U
Athlon II X2 250
Celeron 3215U
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 X2 250 is positioned at rank 955 and the Celeron 3215U is on rank 241, so the Celeron 3215U 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 X2 250
Performance Per Dollar Celeron 3215U
Performance Comparison
About PassMark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
| Insight | Athlon II X2 250 | Celeron 3215U |
|---|---|---|
| Gaming | ✅ Superior gaming performance | ❌ Lower gaming performance |
| Workstation | ❌ Weaker in multi-core tasks | ✅ Better multi-core power |
| Price | ⚠️ Higher cost ($15) | ✅ More affordable ($0) |
| Longevity | 🛑 Legacy (Regor (2009−2013) / 45 nm) | 🛑 Legacy (Broadwell (2015−2019) / 14 nm) |
💎 Value Proposition
| Insight | Athlon II X2 250 | Celeron 3215U |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ❌ Lower cost efficiency | ❌ Lower cost efficiency |
| Upfront Cost | ⚠️ Higher cost ($15) | ✅ 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 X2 250 and Celeron 3215U
Athlon II X2 250
The Athlon II X2 250 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 2 June 2009 (16 years ago). It is based on the Regor (2009−2013) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 3 GHz, with boost up to 3 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: 1,080 points. Launch price was $39.
Celeron 3215U
The Celeron 3215U is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 1 June 2015 (10 years ago). It is based on the Broadwell (2015−2019) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 1.7 GHz, with boost up to 1.7 GHz. L3 cache: 2 MB. L2 cache: 512 kB. Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: FCBGA1168. Thermal design power (TDP): 15 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 1,091 points. Launch price was $107.
Processing Power
Both the Athlon II X2 250 and Celeron 3215U share an identical 2-core/2-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 3 GHz on the Athlon II X2 250 versus 1.7 GHz on the Celeron 3215U — a 55.3% clock advantage for the Athlon II X2 250 (base: 3 GHz vs 1.7 GHz). The Athlon II X2 250 uses the Regor (2009−2013) architecture (45 nm), while the Celeron 3215U uses Broadwell (2015−2019) (14 nm). In PassMark, the Athlon II X2 250 scores 1,080 against the Celeron 3215U's 1,091 — a 1% lead for the Celeron 3215U. L3 cache: 0 kB on the Athlon II X2 250 vs 2 MB on the Celeron 3215U.
| Feature | Athlon II X2 250 | Celeron 3215U |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 2 / 2 | 2 / 2 |
| Boost Clock | 3 GHz+76% | 1.7 GHz |
| Base Clock | 3 GHz+76% | 1.7 GHz |
| L3 Cache | 0 kB | 2 MB |
| L2 Cache | 2 MB+300% | 512 kB |
| Process | 45 nm | 14 nm-69% |
| Architecture | Regor (2009−2013) | Broadwell (2015−2019) |
| PassMark | 1,080 | 1,091+1% |
| Geekbench 6 Single | — | 339 |
Memory & Platform
The Athlon II X2 250 uses the AM3 socket (PCIe 2.0), while the Celeron 3215U uses FCBGA1168 (PCIe 3.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches 1333 on the Athlon II X2 250 versus DDR3L-1600 on the Celeron 3215U — the Athlon II X2 250 supports 199.1% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. Both support up to 16 of RAM. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. PCIe lanes: 0 (Athlon II X2 250) vs 12 (Celeron 3215U) — the Celeron 3215U offers 12 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: AM2+,AM3 (Athlon II X2 250) and Wildcat Point-LP (Celeron 3215U).
| Feature | Athlon II X2 250 | Celeron 3215U |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | AM3 | FCBGA1168 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 2.0 | PCIe 3.0+50% |
| Max RAM Speed | 1333+44333% | DDR3L-1600 |
| Max RAM Capacity | 16 | 16 GB+104857500% |
| RAM Channels | 2 | 2 |
| ECC Support | ❌ | ❌ |
| PCIe Lanes | 0 | 12 |
Advanced Features
Neither processor supports overclocking. Virtualization support: true (Athlon II X2 250) vs VT-x, VT-d (Celeron 3215U). The Celeron 3215U includes integrated graphics (HD Graphics (Broadwell)), while the Athlon II X2 250 requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Celeron 3215U targets Budget. Direct competitor: Athlon II X2 250 rivals Pentium E5700; Celeron 3215U rivals Pentium 3825U.
| Feature | Athlon II X2 250 | Celeron 3215U |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | No | Yes |
| IGPU Model | None | HD Graphics (Broadwell) |
| Unlocked | No | No |
| AVX-512 | No | No |
| Virtualization | true | VT-x, VT-d |
| Target Use | — | Budget |
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 X2 250 and Celeron 3215U
