Athlon II X2 260u vs Celeron Dual-Core T3300
Athlon II X2 260u
Celeron Dual-Core T3300
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 260u is positioned at rank 873 and the Celeron Dual-Core T3300 is on rank 1038, so the Athlon II X2 260u 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 260u
Performance Per Dollar Celeron Dual-Core T3300
Performance Comparison
About PassMark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
| Insight | Athlon II X2 260u | Celeron Dual-Core T3300 |
|---|---|---|
| Gaming | ❌ Lower gaming performance | ✅ Superior gaming performance |
| Workstation | ❌ Weaker in multi-core tasks | ✅ Better multi-core power |
| Price | ✅ More affordable ($10) | ⚠️ Higher cost ($30) |
| Longevity | 🛑 Legacy (Regor (2009−2013) / 45 nm) | 🛑 Legacy (Penryn (2008−2011) / 45 nm) |
💎 Value Proposition
| Insight | Athlon II X2 260u | Celeron Dual-Core T3300 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ✅ Better overall value (+196%) | ❌ Lower cost efficiency |
| Upfront Cost | ✅ More affordable ($10) | ⚠️ Higher cost ($30) |
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 260u and Celeron Dual-Core T3300
Athlon II X2 260u
The Athlon II X2 260u is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 20 October 2009 (16 years ago). It is based on the Regor (2009−2013) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Max frequency: 1.8 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 1 MB. Built on 45 nm process technology. Socket: AM3. Thermal design power (TDP): 25 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 990 points. Launch price was $83.
Celeron Dual-Core T3300
The Celeron Dual-Core T3300 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 2007-01-01. It is based on the Penryn (2008−2011) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Max frequency: 2 GHz. L2 cache: 1 MB. Built on 45 nm process technology. Socket: P. Thermal design power (TDP): 1 MB. Passmark benchmark score: 1,005 points. Launch price was $69.
Processing Power
Both the Athlon II X2 260u and Celeron Dual-Core T3300 share an identical 2-core/2-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 1.8 GHz on the Athlon II X2 260u versus 2 GHz on the Celeron Dual-Core T3300 — a 10.5% clock advantage for the Celeron Dual-Core T3300. The Athlon II X2 260u uses the Regor (2009−2013) architecture (45 nm), while the Celeron Dual-Core T3300 uses Penryn (2008−2011) (45 nm). In PassMark, the Athlon II X2 260u scores 990 against the Celeron Dual-Core T3300's 1,005 — a 1.5% lead for the Celeron Dual-Core T3300.
| Feature | Athlon II X2 260u | Celeron Dual-Core T3300 |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 2 / 2 | 2 / 2 |
| Boost Clock | 1.8 GHz | 2 GHz+11% |
| L3 Cache | 0 kB | — |
| L2 Cache | 1 MB | 1 MB |
| Process | 45 nm | 45 nm |
| Architecture | Regor (2009−2013) | Penryn (2008−2011) |
| PassMark | 990 | 1,005+2% |
| Geekbench 6 Single | — | 300 |
| Geekbench 6 Multi | — | 520 |
Memory & Platform
The Athlon II X2 260u uses the AM3 socket (PCIe 2.0), while the Celeron Dual-Core T3300 uses P (PCIe 1.1) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches 1333 on the Athlon II X2 260u versus DDR3-800 on the Celeron Dual-Core T3300 — the Athlon II X2 260u supports 199.1% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The Athlon II X2 260u supports up to 16 of RAM compared to 8 GB — 66.7% more capacity for professional workloads. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. Both provide 0 PCIe lanes. Chipset compatibility: AM2+,AM3 (Athlon II X2 260u) and GL40,GM45,GS45 (Celeron Dual-Core T3300).
| Feature | Athlon II X2 260u | Celeron Dual-Core T3300 |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | AM3 | P |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 2.0+82% | PCIe 1.1 |
| Max RAM Speed | 1333+44333% | DDR3-800 |
| Max RAM Capacity | 16 | 8 GB+52428700% |
| RAM Channels | 2 | 2 |
| ECC Support | ❌ | ❌ |
| PCIe Lanes | 0 | 0 |
Advanced Features
Neither processor supports overclocking. Virtualization support: true (Athlon II X2 260u) vs No (Celeron Dual-Core T3300). Primary use case: Celeron Dual-Core T3300 targets Budget. Direct competitor: Athlon II X2 260u rivals Core 2 Duo SU9400; Celeron Dual-Core T3300 rivals Pentium T4200.
| Feature | Athlon II X2 260u | Celeron Dual-Core T3300 |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | No | No |
| IGPU Model | None | — |
| Unlocked | No | No |
| AVX-512 | No | No |
| Virtualization | true | No |
| Target Use | — | Budget |
Value Analysis
The Athlon II X2 260u launched at $60 MSRP, while the Celeron Dual-Core T3300 debuted at $86. At current prices ($10 vs $30), the Athlon II X2 260u is $20 cheaper. In terms of value (PassMark points per dollar), the Athlon II X2 260u delivers 99.0 pts/$ vs 33.5 pts/$ for the Celeron Dual-Core T3300 — making the Athlon II X2 260u the 98.9% better value option.
| Feature | Athlon II X2 260u | Celeron Dual-Core T3300 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $60-30% | $86 |
| Avg Price (30d) | $10-67% | $30 |
| Performance per Dollar | 99.0+196% | 33.5 |
| Release Date | 2009 | 2010 |
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 260u and Celeron Dual-Core T3300
