CPU
GPU
Athlon II X4 600e
Celeron Dual-Core T3000
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 X4 600e is positioned at rank 842 and the Celeron Dual-Core T3000 is on rank 824, so the Celeron Dual-Core T3000 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 X4 600e
Performance Per Dollar Celeron Dual-Core T3000
Performance Comparison
About PassMark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
| Insight | Athlon II X4 600e | Celeron Dual-Core T3000 |
|---|---|---|
| Gaming | ✅ Superior gaming performance | ❌ Lower gaming performance |
| Workstation | ❌ Weaker in multi-core tasks | ✅ Better multi-core power |
| Price | ⚠️ Higher cost ($20) | ✅ More affordable ($15) |
| Longevity | 🛑 Legacy (Propus (2009−2011) / 45 nm) | 🛑 Legacy (Penryn-1M (2009) / 45 nm) |
💎 Value Proposition
| Insight | Athlon II X4 600e | Celeron Dual-Core T3000 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ❌ Lower cost efficiency | ✅ Better overall value (+33%) |
| Upfront Cost | ⚠️ Higher cost ($20) | ✅ More affordable ($15) |
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 X4 600e and Celeron Dual-Core T3000
Athlon II X4 600e
The Athlon II X4 600e is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 20 October 2009 (16 years ago). It is based on the Propus (2009−2011) architecture. It features 4 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 2.2 GHz, with boost up to 2.2 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 512 kB (per core). Built on 45 nm process technology. Socket: AM3. Thermal design power (TDP): 45 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 1,795 points. Launch price was $130.
Celeron Dual-Core T3000
The Celeron Dual-Core T3000 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 2007-01-01. It is based on the Penryn-1M (2009) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Max frequency: 1.8 GHz. L2 cache: 1 MB. Built on 45 nm process technology. Socket: P. Thermal design power (TDP): 1 MB. Passmark benchmark score: 1,797 points. Launch price was $69.
Processing Power
The Athlon II X4 600e packs 4 cores / 4 threads, while the Celeron Dual-Core T3000 offers 2 cores / 2 threads — the Athlon II X4 600e has 2 more cores. Boost clocks reach 2.2 GHz on the Athlon II X4 600e versus 1.8 GHz on the Celeron Dual-Core T3000 — a 20% clock advantage for the Athlon II X4 600e. The Athlon II X4 600e uses the Propus (2009−2011) architecture (45 nm), while the Celeron Dual-Core T3000 uses Penryn-1M (2009) (45 nm). In PassMark, the Athlon II X4 600e scores 1,795 against the Celeron Dual-Core T3000's 1,797 — a 0.1% lead for the Celeron Dual-Core T3000.
| Feature | Athlon II X4 600e | Celeron Dual-Core T3000 |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 4 / 4+100% | 2 / 2 |
| Boost Clock | 2.2 GHz+22% | 1.8 GHz |
| Base Clock | 2.2 GHz | — |
| L3 Cache | 0 kB | — |
| L2 Cache | 512 kB (per core) | 1 MB+100% |
| Process | 45 nm | 45 nm |
| Architecture | Propus (2009−2011) | Penryn-1M (2009) |
| PassMark | 1,795 | 1,797 |
Memory & Platform
The Athlon II X4 600e uses the AM3 socket (PCIe 2.0), while the Celeron Dual-Core T3000 uses P (PCIe 1.1) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Both support up to DDR3-1333 memory speed. The Athlon II X4 600e supports up to 16 GB of RAM compared to 8 GB — 66.7% more capacity for professional workloads. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. Both provide 16 PCIe lanes. Chipset compatibility: Socket AM3 (Athlon II X4 600e) and Mobile Intel 4 Series (Celeron Dual-Core T3000).
| Feature | Athlon II X4 600e | Celeron Dual-Core T3000 |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | AM3 | P |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 2.0+82% | PCIe 1.1 |
| Max RAM Speed | DDR3-1333 | DDR3-800 |
| Max RAM Capacity | 16 GB+100% | 8 GB |
| RAM Channels | 2 | 2 |
| ECC Support | ❌ | ❌ |
| PCIe Lanes | 16 | 16 |
Advanced Features
Neither processor supports overclocking. Virtualization support: AMD-V (Athlon II X4 600e) vs false (Celeron Dual-Core T3000).
| Feature | Athlon II X4 600e | Celeron Dual-Core T3000 |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | No | No |
| Unlocked | No | No |
| AVX-512 | No | No |
| Virtualization | AMD-V | false |
Value Analysis
The Athlon II X4 600e launched at $100 MSRP, while the Celeron Dual-Core T3000 debuted at $80. At current prices ($20 vs $15), the Celeron Dual-Core T3000 is $5 cheaper. In terms of value (PassMark points per dollar), the Athlon II X4 600e delivers 89.8 pts/$ vs 119.8 pts/$ for the Celeron Dual-Core T3000 — making the Celeron Dual-Core T3000 the 28.7% better value option.
| Feature | Athlon II X4 600e | Celeron Dual-Core T3000 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $100 | $80-20% |
| Avg Price (30d) | $20 | $15-25% |
| Performance per Dollar | 89.8 | 119.8+33% |
| 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 X4 600e and Celeron Dual-Core T3000
