Athlon Neo MV-40 vs Celeron 1020M
Athlon Neo MV-40
Celeron 1020M
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 Neo MV-40 is positioned at rank 1020 and the Celeron 1020M is on rank 170, so the Celeron 1020M offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar Athlon Neo MV-40
Performance Per Dollar Celeron 1020M
Performance Comparison
About PassMark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
| Insight | Athlon Neo MV-40 | Celeron 1020M |
|---|---|---|
| Gaming | ❌ Lower gaming performance | ✅ Superior gaming performance |
| Workstation | ❌ Weaker in multi-core tasks | ✅ Better multi-core power |
| Price | ⚠️ Higher cost ($5) | ✅ More affordable ($0) |
| Longevity | 🛑 Legacy (Huron (2009) / 65 nm) | 🛑 Legacy (Ivy Bridge (2012−2013) / 22 nm) |
💎 Value Proposition
| Insight | Athlon Neo MV-40 | Celeron 1020M |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ❌ Lower cost efficiency | ❌ Lower cost efficiency |
| Upfront Cost | ⚠️ Higher cost ($5) | ✅ 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 Neo MV-40 and Celeron 1020M
Athlon Neo MV-40
The Athlon Neo MV-40 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 2009-01-01. It is based on the Huron (2009) architecture. It features 1 cores and 1 threads. Max frequency: 1.6 GHz. L2 cache: 512 kB. Built on 65 nm process technology. Socket: ASB1. Thermal design power (TDP): 512 kB. Passmark benchmark score: 1,274 points. Launch price was $149.
Celeron 1020M
The Celeron 1020M is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 20 January 2013 (12 years ago). It is based on the Ivy Bridge (2012−2013) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 2.1 GHz, with boost up to 2.1 GHz. L3 cache: 2 MB (total). L2 cache: 256K (per core). Built on 22 nm process technology. Socket: PGA988. Thermal design power (TDP): 35 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 1,275 points. Launch price was $86.
Processing Power
The Athlon Neo MV-40 packs 1 cores / 1 threads, while the Celeron 1020M offers 2 cores / 2 threads — the Celeron 1020M has 1 more core. Boost clocks reach 1.6 GHz on the Athlon Neo MV-40 versus 2.1 GHz on the Celeron 1020M — a 27% clock advantage for the Celeron 1020M. The Athlon Neo MV-40 uses the Huron (2009) architecture (65 nm), while the Celeron 1020M uses Ivy Bridge (2012−2013) (22 nm). In PassMark, the Athlon Neo MV-40 scores 1,274 against the Celeron 1020M's 1,275 — a 0.1% lead for the Celeron 1020M.
| Feature | Athlon Neo MV-40 | Celeron 1020M |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 1 / 1 | 2 / 2+100% |
| Boost Clock | 1.6 GHz | 2.1 GHz+31% |
| Base Clock | — | 2.1 GHz |
| L3 Cache | — | 2 MB (total) |
| L2 Cache | 512 kB+100% | 256K (per core) |
| Process | 65 nm | 22 nm-66% |
| Architecture | Huron (2009) | Ivy Bridge (2012−2013) |
| PassMark | 1,274 | 1,275 |
Memory & Platform
The Athlon Neo MV-40 uses the ASB1 socket (PCIe 2.0), while the Celeron 1020M uses PGA988 (PCIe 3.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR2-667 on the Athlon Neo MV-40 versus DDR3-1600 on the Celeron 1020M — the Celeron 1020M supports 40% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The Celeron 1020M supports up to 32 GB of RAM compared to 4 GB — 155.6% more capacity for professional workloads. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. PCIe lanes: 0 (Athlon Neo MV-40) vs 16 (Celeron 1020M) — the Celeron 1020M offers 16 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: AMD ASB1 (Athlon Neo MV-40) and HM77,HM76,HM75 (Celeron 1020M).
| Feature | Athlon Neo MV-40 | Celeron 1020M |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | ASB1 | PGA988 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 2.0 | PCIe 3.0+50% |
| Max RAM Speed | DDR2-667 | DDR3-1600+50% |
| Max RAM Capacity | 4 GB | 32 GB+700% |
| RAM Channels | 2 | 2 |
| ECC Support | ❌ | ❌ |
| PCIe Lanes | 0 | 16 |
Advanced Features
Virtualization: not specified (Athlon Neo MV-40) / VT-x (Celeron 1020M). The Celeron 1020M includes integrated graphics (HD Graphics (Ivy Bridge)), while the Athlon Neo MV-40 requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Celeron 1020M targets Budget. Direct competitor: Celeron 1020M rivals Pentium 2020M.
| Feature | Athlon Neo MV-40 | Celeron 1020M |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | No | Yes |
| IGPU Model | — | HD Graphics (Ivy Bridge) |
| Unlocked | — | No |
| AVX-512 | — | No |
| Virtualization | — | VT-x |
| 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 Neo MV-40 and Celeron 1020M
