Athlon II X2 250 vs Celeron E3200
Athlon II X2 250
Celeron E3200
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 E3200 is on rank 683, so the Celeron E3200 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 E3200
Performance Comparison
About PassMark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
| Insight | Athlon II X2 250 | Celeron E3200 |
|---|---|---|
| Gaming | ✅ Superior gaming performance | ❌ Lower gaming performance |
| Workstation | ❌ Weaker in multi-core tasks | ✅ Better multi-core power |
| Price | ⚠️ Higher cost ($15) | ✅ More affordable ($5) |
| Longevity | 🛑 Legacy (Regor (2009−2013) / 45 nm) | 🛑 Legacy (Wolfdale (2008−2010) / 45 nm) |
💎 Value Proposition
| Insight | Athlon II X2 250 | Celeron E3200 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ❌ Lower cost efficiency | ✅ Better overall value (+203%) |
| Upfront Cost | ⚠️ Higher cost ($15) | ✅ More affordable ($5) |
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 E3200
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 E3200
The Celeron E3200 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 30 August 2009 (16 years ago). It is based on the Wolfdale (2008−2010) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 2.4 GHz, with boost up to 2.4 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 1 MB (total). Built on 45 nm process technology. Socket: LGA775. Thermal design power (TDP): 65 Watt. Memory support: DDR1, DDR2, DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 1,090 points. Launch price was $52.
Processing Power
Both the Athlon II X2 250 and Celeron E3200 share an identical 2-core/2-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 3 GHz on the Athlon II X2 250 versus 2.4 GHz on the Celeron E3200 — a 22.2% clock advantage for the Athlon II X2 250 (base: 3 GHz vs 2.4 GHz). The Athlon II X2 250 uses the Regor (2009−2013) architecture (45 nm), while the Celeron E3200 uses Wolfdale (2008−2010) (45 nm). In PassMark, the Athlon II X2 250 scores 1,080 against the Celeron E3200's 1,090 — a 0.9% lead for the Celeron E3200. Both processors carry 0 kB of L3 cache.
| Feature | Athlon II X2 250 | Celeron E3200 |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 2 / 2 | 2 / 2 |
| Boost Clock | 3 GHz+25% | 2.4 GHz |
| Base Clock | 3 GHz+25% | 2.4 GHz |
| L3 Cache | 0 kB | 0 kB |
| L2 Cache | 2 MB+100% | 1 MB (total) |
| Process | 45 nm | 45 nm |
| Architecture | Regor (2009−2013) | Wolfdale (2008−2010) |
| PassMark | 1,080 | 1,090 |
| Geekbench 6 Single | — | 340 |
| Geekbench 6 Multi | — | 610 |
Memory & Platform
The Athlon II X2 250 uses the AM3 socket (PCIe 2.0), while the Celeron E3200 uses LGA775 (PCIe 1.1) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches 1333 on the Athlon II X2 250 versus DDR2-800 on the Celeron E3200 — the Athlon II X2 250 supports 199.4% 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. Both provide 0 PCIe lanes. Chipset compatibility: AM2+,AM3 (Athlon II X2 250) and G31,G41,P45 (Celeron E3200).
| Feature | Athlon II X2 250 | Celeron E3200 |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | AM3 | LGA775 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 2.0+82% | PCIe 1.1 |
| Max RAM Speed | 1333+66550% | DDR2-800 |
| Max RAM Capacity | 16 | 16 GB+104857500% |
| RAM Channels | 2 | 2 |
| ECC Support | ❌ | ❌ |
| PCIe Lanes | 0 | 0 |
Advanced Features
Neither processor supports overclocking. Virtualization support: true (Athlon II X2 250) vs VT-x (Celeron E3200). Primary use case: Celeron E3200 targets Budget. Direct competitor: Athlon II X2 250 rivals Pentium E5700; Celeron E3200 rivals Pentium E5200.
| Feature | Athlon II X2 250 | Celeron E3200 |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | No | No |
| IGPU Model | None | — |
| Unlocked | No | No |
| AVX-512 | No | No |
| Virtualization | true | VT-x |
| Target Use | — | Budget |
Value Analysis
The Athlon II X2 250 launched at $87 MSRP, while the Celeron E3200 debuted at $43. At current prices ($15 vs $5), the Celeron E3200 is $10 cheaper. In terms of value (PassMark points per dollar), the Athlon II X2 250 delivers 72.0 pts/$ vs 218.0 pts/$ for the Celeron E3200 — making the Celeron E3200 the 100.7% better value option.
| Feature | Athlon II X2 250 | Celeron E3200 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $87 | $43-51% |
| Avg Price (30d) | $15 | $5-67% |
| Performance per Dollar | 72.0 | 218.0+203% |
| 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 X2 250 and Celeron E3200
