Athlon X2 QL-64 vs Celeron Dual-Core T1500

Athlon X2 QL-64 vs Celeron Dual-Core T1500 Performance Spectrum

Athlon X2 QL-64

2 / 2

1,614

0.0%

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5945WX

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7955WX

Ryzen Threadripper 3990X

Celeron Dual-Core T1500

2 / 2

1,625

+0.7%

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 X2 QL-64 vs Celeron Dual-Core T1500 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 X2 QL-64 vs Celeron Dual-Core T1500: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

Athlon X2 QL-64

2009

Why buy it

✅Draws 1W instead of 512W, a 511W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (1,614 vs 1,625).
❌Launch MSRP is still $50 MSRP, while Celeron Dual-Core T1500 mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.

Celeron Dual-Core T1500

2008

Why buy it

✅+0.7% higher PassMark.

Trade-offs

❌51100% higher power demand at 512W vs 1W.

Quick Answers

So, is Athlon X2 QL-64 better than Celeron Dual-Core T1500?

It depends on what you want from the system. For gaming, Athlon X2 QL-64 is ahead with a 2.5% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. For rendering, compiling, streaming, and heavier multitasking, Celeron Dual-Core T1500 pulls ahead with 0.7% better PassMark.

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Celeron Dual-Core T1500 is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.7% better PassMark, backed by 2 cores and 2 threads.

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

Athlon X2 QL-64 is the better buy right now. Athlon X2 QL-64 comes in at an unclear MSRP at $50 MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it still gives you a 2.5% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. The compromise is that Celeron Dual-Core T1500 is still stronger for heavier multi-core work with 0.7% better PassMark. It is also 100.0% better value on MSRP (32.3 vs 0.0 PassMark/$), so you are getting the faster CPU without taking a value hit on paper.

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

Athlon X2 QL-64 makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2009 vs 2008). That makes it the safer long-term bet.

Athlon X2 QL-64 vs Celeron Dual-Core T1500 Technical Specifications

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

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 Dual-Core T1500

The Celeron Dual-Core T1500 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 2007-01-01. It is based on the Merom (2006−2008) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Max frequency: 1.87 GHz. L2 cache: 512 kB. Built on 65 nm process technology. Thermal design power (TDP): 512 kB. Passmark benchmark score: 1,625 points. Launch price was $69.

⚡

Processing Power

Both the Athlon X2 QL-64 and Celeron Dual-Core T1500 share an identical 2-core/2-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 2.1 GHz on the Athlon X2 QL-64 versus 1.87 GHz on the Celeron Dual-Core T1500 — a 11.6% clock advantage for the Athlon X2 QL-64. The Athlon X2 QL-64 uses the Lion (2008−2009) architecture (65 nm), while the Celeron Dual-Core T1500 uses Merom (2006−2008) (65 nm). In PassMark, the Athlon X2 QL-64 scores 1,614 against the Celeron Dual-Core T1500's 1,625 — a 0.7% lead for the Celeron Dual-Core T1500.

Feature	Athlon X2 QL-64	Celeron Dual-Core T1500
Cores / Threads	2 / 2	2 / 2
Boost Clock	2.1 GHz+12%	1.87 GHz
L3 Cache	0 kB	—
L2 Cache	1 MB+100%	512 kB
Process	65 nm	65 nm
Architecture	Lion (2008−2009)	Merom (2006−2008)
PassMark	1,614	1,625

🧠

Memory & Platform

Both support up to DDR2-667 memory speed. The Athlon X2 QL-64 supports up to 8 GB of RAM compared to 4 GB — 100% more capacity for professional workloads. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. Both provide 0 PCIe lanes. Chipset compatibility: Socket S1 (Athlon X2 QL-64) and GM965,GL960 (Celeron Dual-Core T1500).

Feature	Athlon X2 QL-64	Celeron Dual-Core T1500
Socket	S1	—
PCIe Generation	PCIe 2.0+82%	PCIe 1.1
Max RAM Speed	DDR2-667	DDR2-667
Max RAM Capacity	8 GB+100%	4 GB
RAM Channels	2	2
ECC Support	No	No
PCIe Lanes	0	0

🔧

Advanced Features

Neither processor supports overclocking. Virtualization support: AMD-V (Athlon X2 QL-64) vs No (Celeron Dual-Core T1500). Primary use case: Celeron Dual-Core T1500 targets Budget. Direct competitor: Celeron Dual-Core T1500 rivals Pentium T2390.