Athlon MP 2800+ vs Celeron 2.60

Athlon MP 2800+ vs Celeron 2.60 Performance Spectrum

Athlon MP 2800+

1 / 1

380

0.0%

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3955WX

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7955WX

Ryzen Threadripper 3990X

Celeron 2.60

1 / 1

385

+1.3%

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 MP 2800+ vs Celeron 2.60 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 MP 2800+ vs Celeron 2.60: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

Athlon MP 2800+

2003

Why buy it

✅Draws 60W instead of 73W, a 13W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (380 vs 385).
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 1.4 vs 7.3 PassMark/$ ($275 MSRP vs $53 MSRP).

Celeron 2.60

2003

Why buy it

✅Costs $222 less on MSRP ($53 MSRP vs $275 MSRP).
✅Delivers 425.7% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 7.3 vs 1.4 PassMark/$ ($53 MSRP vs $275 MSRP).

Trade-offs

❌21.7% higher power demand at 73W vs 60W.

Quick Answers

So, is Celeron 2.60 better than Athlon MP 2800+?

Yes. Celeron 2.60 is the better all-around CPU here. It gives you a 0.2% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data, 1.3% better PassMark, and the stronger long-term platform, which is enough to make it the stronger overall pick.

Which one is better for gaming?

If gaming is the priority, Celeron 2.60 is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 0.2% more average FPS across 50 shared CPU game tests.

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Celeron 2.60 is the stronger fit. You are getting 1.3% better PassMark, backed by 1 cores and 1 threads.

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

Celeron 2.60 is the better buy right now. Celeron 2.60 comes in $222 cheaper on MSRP at $53 MSRP versus $275 MSRP, and it still gives you a 0.2% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. It is also 425.7% better value on MSRP (7.3 vs 1.4 PassMark/$), 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 2.60 makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting more multi-core headroom with 1 cores / 1 threads instead of 1/1. That extra compute headroom is more likely to matter as games, background tasks, and creator workloads get heavier.

Athlon MP 2800+ vs Celeron 2.60 Technical Specifications

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

Athlon MP 2800+

The Athlon MP 2800+ is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 6 May 2003 (22 years ago). It is based on the K7 (2000−2004) architecture. It features 1 cores and 1 threads. Max frequency: 2.13 GHz. L2 cache: 512 kB. Built on 130 nm process technology. Thermal design power (TDP): 60 Watt. Passmark benchmark score: 380 points. Launch price was $275.

Celeron 2.60

The Celeron 2.60 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 2007-01-01. It is based on the Northwood (2002−2004) architecture. It features 1 cores and 1 threads. Max frequency: 2.6 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 128 kB. Built on 130 nm process technology. Socket: PGA478. Thermal design power (TDP): 73 Watt. Memory support: DDR1, DDR2. Passmark benchmark score: 385 points. Launch price was $69.

⚡

Processing Power

Both the Athlon MP 2800+ and Celeron 2.60 share an identical 1-core/1-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 2.13 GHz on the Athlon MP 2800+ versus 2.6 GHz on the Celeron 2.60 — a 19.9% clock advantage for the Celeron 2.60. The Athlon MP 2800+ uses the K7 (2000−2004) architecture (130 nm), while the Celeron 2.60 uses Northwood (2002−2004) (130 nm). In PassMark, the Athlon MP 2800+ scores 380 against the Celeron 2.60's 385 — a 1.3% lead for the Celeron 2.60.

Feature	Athlon MP 2800+	Celeron 2.60
Cores / Threads	1 / 1	1 / 1
Boost Clock	2.13 GHz	2.6 GHz+22%
L3 Cache	—	0 kB
L2 Cache	512 kB+300%	128 kB
Process	130 nm	130 nm
Architecture	K7 (2000−2004)	Northwood (2002−2004)
PassMark	380	385+1%

🧠

Memory & Platform

Maximum memory speed reaches DDR-266 on the Athlon MP 2800+ versus DDR2-400 on the Celeron 2.60 — the Celeron 2.60 supports -250.4% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. Both support up to 4 GB of RAM. Both feature 1-channel memory with ECC support. Both provide 0 PCIe lanes. Chipset compatibility: AMD Socket A (Athlon MP 2800+) and 845,865,915 (Celeron 2.60).

Feature	Athlon MP 2800+	Celeron 2.60
Socket	—	PGA478
PCIe Generation	PCIe 1.1	PCIe 1.1
Max RAM Speed	DDR-266	DDR2-400
Max RAM Capacity	4 GB	4 GB
RAM Channels	1	1
ECC Support	Yes	No
PCIe Lanes	0	0

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization: not specified (Athlon MP 2800+) / No (Celeron 2.60). Primary use case: Celeron 2.60 targets Budget. Direct competitor: Celeron 2.60 rivals Pentium 4 2.40.

Feature	Athlon MP 2800+	Celeron 2.60
Integrated GPU	No	No
Unlocked	—	No
AVX-512	—	No
Virtualization	—	No
Target Use	—	Budget

💰

Value Analysis

At launch, the Athlon MP 2800+ was priced at $275, while the Celeron 2.60 came in at $53. On launch pricing ($275 vs $53), Celeron 2.60 was $222 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Athlon MP 2800+ delivers 1.4 pts/$ vs 7.3 pts/$ for the Celeron 2.60 — making the Celeron 2.60 the 136.1% better value option.

Feature	Athlon MP 2800+	Celeron 2.60
MSRP	$275	$53-81%
Performance per Dollar	1.4	7.3+421%
Release Date	2003	2003

Search Athlon MP 2800+ on Amazon

Search Celeron 2.60 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.