Athlon PRO 300U vs Celeron N5095

Athlon PRO 300U vs Celeron N5095 Performance Spectrum

Athlon PRO 300U

2 / 4

4,080

+1.7%

Ryzen Threadripper 3990X

Celeron N5095

4 / 4

4,013

0.0%

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 PRO 300U vs Celeron N5095 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 PRO 300U vs Celeron N5095: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

Athlon PRO 300U

2019

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +5.6% higher average FPS across 36 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅100+% more PCIe lanes (8 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with AMD Radeon Vega 3, while Celeron N5095 needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌900% higher power demand at 15W vs 1.5W.

Celeron N5095

2021

Why buy it

✅Draws 2W instead of 15W, a 14W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Athlon PRO 300U across 36 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (4,013 vs 4,080).
❌No integrated graphics, while Athlon PRO 300U can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Quick Answers

So, is Athlon PRO 300U better than Celeron N5095?

Yes. Athlon PRO 300U is the better all-around CPU here. It gives you a 5.6% average FPS lead across 36 shared CPU game tests in our data and 1.7% better PassMark, which is enough to make it the stronger overall pick.

Which one is better for gaming?

If gaming is the priority, Athlon PRO 300U is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 5.6% more average FPS across 36 shared CPU game tests.

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Athlon PRO 300U is the stronger fit. You are getting 1.7% better PassMark, backed by 2 cores and 4 threads.

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

Athlon PRO 300U still makes the most sense overall. Athlon PRO 300U comes in at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it still gives you a 5.6% average FPS lead across 36 shared CPU game tests in our data.

Which one is more future-proof for 2026 and beyond?

Celeron N5095 makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2021 vs 2019). That makes it the safer long-term bet.

Athlon PRO 300U vs Celeron N5095 Technical Specifications

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

Athlon PRO 300U

The Athlon PRO 300U is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 2009-01-01. It is based on the Raven Ridge 2 (2019) architecture. It features 2 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 2.4 GHz, with boost up to 3.3 GHz. L3 cache: 4 MB (total). L2 cache: 512K (per core). Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: FP5. Thermal design power (TDP): 15 Watt. Memory support: DDR4 Dual-channel. Passmark benchmark score: 4,080 points. Launch price was $149.

Celeron N5095

The Celeron N5095 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 2007-01-01. It is based on the Jasper Lake (2021) architecture. It features 4 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 2 GHz, with boost up to 2.9 GHz. L3 cache: 4 MB. L2 cache: 1.5 MB. Built on 10 nm process technology. Socket: BGA1338. Thermal design power (TDP): 15 Watt. Memory support: DDR4. Passmark benchmark score: 4,013 points. Launch price was $69.

⚡

Processing Power

The Athlon PRO 300U packs 2 cores / 4 threads, while the Celeron N5095 offers 4 cores / 4 threads — the Celeron N5095 has 2 more cores. Boost clocks reach 3.3 GHz on the Athlon PRO 300U versus 2.9 GHz on the Celeron N5095 — a 12.9% clock advantage for the Athlon PRO 300U (base: 2.4 GHz vs 2 GHz). The Athlon PRO 300U uses the Raven Ridge 2 (2019) architecture (14 nm), while the Celeron N5095 uses Jasper Lake (2021) (10 nm). In PassMark, the Athlon PRO 300U scores 4,080 against the Celeron N5095's 4,013 — a 1.7% lead for the Athlon PRO 300U. L3 cache: 4 MB (total) on the Athlon PRO 300U vs 4 MB on the Celeron N5095.

Feature	Athlon PRO 300U	Celeron N5095
Cores / Threads	2 / 4	4 / 4+100%
Boost Clock	3.3 GHz+14%	2.9 GHz
Base Clock	2.4 GHz+20%	2 GHz
L3 Cache	4 MB (total)	4 MB
L2 Cache	512K (per core)+34033%	1.5 MB
Process	14 nm	10 nm-29%
Architecture	Raven Ridge 2 (2019)	Jasper Lake (2021)
PassMark	4,080+2%	4,013

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Athlon PRO 300U uses the FP5 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Celeron N5095 uses BGA1338 (PCIe 4.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.