Athlon X2 QL-64 vs Celeron 1007U
Athlon X2 QL-64
Celeron 1007U
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 X2 QL-64 is positioned at rank 665 and the Celeron 1007U is on rank 99, so the Celeron 1007U offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar Athlon X2 QL-64
Performance Per Dollar Celeron 1007U
Performance Comparison
About PassMark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
| Insight | Athlon X2 QL-64 | Celeron 1007U |
|---|---|---|
| Gaming | ✅ Superior gaming performance | ❌ Lower gaming performance |
| Workstation | ✅ Better multi-core power | ❌ Weaker in multi-core tasks |
| Price | ⚠️ Higher cost ($15) | ✅ More affordable ($0) |
| Longevity | 🛑 Legacy (Lion (2008−2009) / 65 nm) | 🛑 Legacy (Ivy Bridge (2012−2013) / 22 nm) |
💎 Value Proposition
| Insight | Athlon X2 QL-64 | Celeron 1007U |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ❌ Lower cost efficiency | ❌ Lower cost efficiency |
| Upfront Cost | ⚠️ Higher cost ($15) | ✅ 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 X2 QL-64 and Celeron 1007U
Athlon X2 QL-64
The Athlon X2 QL-64 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 2009-01-01. It is based on the Lion (2008−2009) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Max frequency: 2.1 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 1 MB. Built on 65 nm process technology. Socket: S1. Thermal design power (TDP): 1 MB. Passmark benchmark score: 1,614 points. Launch price was $149.
Celeron 1007U
The Celeron 1007U 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 1.5 GHz, with boost up to 1.5 GHz. L3 cache: 2 MB (total). L2 cache: 256K (per core). Built on 22 nm process technology. Socket: BGA1023. Thermal design power (TDP): 17 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 1,610 points. Launch price was $86.
Processing Power
Both the Athlon X2 QL-64 and Celeron 1007U share an identical 2-core/2-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 2.1 GHz on the Athlon X2 QL-64 versus 1.5 GHz on the Celeron 1007U — a 33.3% clock advantage for the Athlon X2 QL-64. The Athlon X2 QL-64 uses the Lion (2008−2009) architecture (65 nm), while the Celeron 1007U uses Ivy Bridge (2012−2013) (22 nm). In PassMark, the Athlon X2 QL-64 scores 1,614 against the Celeron 1007U's 1,610 — a 0.2% lead for the Athlon X2 QL-64. L3 cache: 0 kB on the Athlon X2 QL-64 vs 2 MB (total) on the Celeron 1007U.
| Feature | Athlon X2 QL-64 | Celeron 1007U |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 2 / 2 | 2 / 2 |
| Boost Clock | 2.1 GHz+40% | 1.5 GHz |
| Base Clock | — | 1.5 GHz |
| L3 Cache | 0 kB | 2 MB (total) |
| L2 Cache | 1 MB+300% | 256K (per core) |
| Process | 65 nm | 22 nm-66% |
| Architecture | Lion (2008−2009) | Ivy Bridge (2012−2013) |
| PassMark | 1,614 | 1,610 |
Memory & Platform
The Athlon X2 QL-64 uses the S1 socket (PCIe 2.0), while the Celeron 1007U uses BGA1023 (PCIe 3.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR2-667 on the Athlon X2 QL-64 versus DDR3-1600 on the Celeron 1007U — the Celeron 1007U supports 40% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The Celeron 1007U supports up to 32 GB of RAM compared to 8 GB — 120% more capacity for professional workloads. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. PCIe lanes: 0 (Athlon X2 QL-64) vs 16 (Celeron 1007U) — the Celeron 1007U offers 16 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: Socket S1 (Athlon X2 QL-64) and Intel FCBGA1023 (Celeron 1007U).
| Feature | Athlon X2 QL-64 | Celeron 1007U |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | S1 | BGA1023 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 2.0 | PCIe 3.0+50% |
| Max RAM Speed | DDR2-667 | DDR3-1600+50% |
| Max RAM Capacity | 8 GB | 32 GB+300% |
| RAM Channels | 2 | 2 |
| ECC Support | ❌ | ❌ |
| PCIe Lanes | 0 | 16 |
Advanced Features
Virtualization: AMD-V (Athlon X2 QL-64) / not specified (Celeron 1007U). The Celeron 1007U includes integrated graphics (Intel HD Graphics (Ivy Bridge)), while the Athlon X2 QL-64 requires a dedicated GPU.
| Feature | Athlon X2 QL-64 | Celeron 1007U |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | No | Yes |
| IGPU Model | — | Intel HD Graphics (Ivy Bridge) |
| Unlocked | No | — |
| AVX-512 | No | — |
| Virtualization | AMD-V | — |
Top Performing CPUs
The most powerful cpus ranked by PassMark CPU Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar CPU comparisons based on Athlon X2 QL-64 and Celeron 1007U
