Athlon Neo X2 L325 vs Celeron U3600
Athlon Neo X2 L325
Celeron U3600
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 X2 L325 is positioned at rank 1185 and the Celeron U3600 is on rank 1213, so the Athlon Neo X2 L325 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 X2 L325
Performance Per Dollar Celeron U3600
Performance Comparison
About PassMark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
| Insight | Athlon Neo X2 L325 | Celeron U3600 |
|---|---|---|
| Gaming | ✅ Superior gaming performance | ❌ Lower gaming performance |
| Workstation | ❌ Weaker in multi-core tasks | ✅ Better multi-core power |
| Price | ✅ More affordable ($5) | ⚠️ Higher cost ($134) |
| Longevity | 🛑 Legacy (Congo (2009) / 65 nm) | 🛑 Legacy (Westmere (2010−2011) / 32 nm) |
💎 Value Proposition
| Insight | Athlon Neo X2 L325 | Celeron U3600 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ✅ Better overall value (+2537%) | ❌ Lower cost efficiency |
| Upfront Cost | ✅ More affordable ($5) | ⚠️ Higher cost ($134) |
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 X2 L325 and Celeron U3600
Athlon Neo X2 L325
The Athlon Neo X2 L325 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 2009-01-01. It is based on the Congo (2009) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Max frequency: 1.5 GHz. L2 cache: 1 MB. Built on 65 nm process technology. Socket: ASB1. Thermal design power (TDP): 1 MB. Memory support: DDR2. Passmark benchmark score: 615 points. Launch price was $149.
Celeron U3600
The Celeron U3600 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 2007-01-01. It is based on the Westmere (2010−2011) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 1.2 GHz, with boost up to 0.1 GHz. L3 cache: 2 MB. L2 cache: 512 kB. Built on 32 nm process technology. Socket: BGA1288. Thermal design power (TDP): 18 Watt. Memory support: DDR3-800. Passmark benchmark score: 625 points. Launch price was $69.
Processing Power
Both the Athlon Neo X2 L325 and Celeron U3600 share an identical 2-core/2-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 1.5 GHz on the Athlon Neo X2 L325 versus 0.1 GHz on the Celeron U3600 — a 175% clock advantage for the Athlon Neo X2 L325. The Athlon Neo X2 L325 uses the Congo (2009) architecture (65 nm), while the Celeron U3600 uses Westmere (2010−2011) (32 nm). In PassMark, the Athlon Neo X2 L325 scores 615 against the Celeron U3600's 625 — a 1.6% lead for the Celeron U3600.
| Feature | Athlon Neo X2 L325 | Celeron U3600 |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 2 / 2 | 2 / 2 |
| Boost Clock | 1.5 GHz+1400% | 0.1 GHz |
| Base Clock | — | 1.2 GHz |
| L3 Cache | — | 2 MB |
| L2 Cache | 1 MB+100% | 512 kB |
| Process | 65 nm | 32 nm-51% |
| Architecture | Congo (2009) | Westmere (2010−2011) |
| PassMark | 615 | 625+2% |
Memory & Platform
The Athlon Neo X2 L325 uses the ASB1 socket (PCIe 2.0), while the Celeron U3600 uses BGA1288 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.
| Feature | Athlon Neo X2 L325 | Celeron U3600 |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | ASB1 | BGA1288 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 2.0 | PCIe 2.0 |
| Max RAM Speed | DDR2-667 | — |
| Max RAM Capacity | 4 GB | — |
| RAM Channels | 2 | — |
| ECC Support | ❌ | — |
| PCIe Lanes | 0 | — |
Value Analysis
The Athlon Neo X2 L325 launched at $100 MSRP, while the Celeron U3600 debuted at $134. At current prices ($5 vs $134), the Athlon Neo X2 L325 is $129 cheaper. In terms of value (PassMark points per dollar), the Athlon Neo X2 L325 delivers 123.0 pts/$ vs 4.7 pts/$ for the Celeron U3600 — making the Athlon Neo X2 L325 the 185.4% better value option.
| Feature | Athlon Neo X2 L325 | Celeron U3600 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $100-25% | $134 |
| Avg Price (30d) | $5-96% | $134 |
| Performance per Dollar | 123.0+2517% | 4.7 |
| Release Date | 2009 | 2011 |
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 X2 L325 and Celeron U3600
