Athlon XP 2400+ vs Celeron 220

Athlon XP 2400+ vs Celeron 220 Performance Spectrum

Athlon XP 2400+

1 / 1

305

0.0%

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3955WX

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7955WX

Ryzen Threadripper 3990X

Ryzen Threadripper 7970X

Celeron 220

1 / 1

320

+4.9%

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 XP 2400+ vs Celeron 220 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 XP 2400+ vs Celeron 220: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

Athlon XP 2400+

2002

Why buy it

✅Draws 68W instead of 512W, a 444W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (305 vs 320).
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 1.6 vs 7.6 PassMark/$ ($193 MSRP vs $42 MSRP).

Celeron 220

2007

Why buy it

✅+4.9% higher PassMark.
✅Costs $151 less on MSRP ($42 MSRP vs $193 MSRP).
✅Delivers 382.1% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 7.6 vs 1.6 PassMark/$ ($42 MSRP vs $193 MSRP).

Trade-offs

❌652.9% higher power demand at 512W vs 68W.

Quick Answers

So, is Celeron 220 better than Athlon XP 2400+?

It depends on what you want from the system. For gaming, Athlon XP 2400+ is ahead with 66.7% higher max boost clock. For rendering, compiling, streaming, and heavier multitasking, Celeron 220 pulls ahead with 4.9% better PassMark.

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Celeron 220 is the stronger fit. You are getting 4.9% better PassMark, backed by 1 cores and 1 threads.

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

Celeron 220 is the better buy right now. Celeron 220 comes in $151 cheaper on MSRP at $42 MSRP versus $193 MSRP, and it still gives you 4.9% better PassMark. The compromise is that Athlon XP 2400+ is still the better pure gaming CPU with 66.7% higher max boost clock. It is also 382.1% better value on MSRP (7.6 vs 1.6 PassMark/$), so you are getting the faster CPU without taking a value hit on paper.

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

Celeron 220 makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2007 vs 2002) and more multi-core headroom with 1 cores / 1 threads instead of 1/1. That extra compute headroom is more likely to matter as games, background tasks, and creator workloads get heavier.

Athlon XP 2400+ vs Celeron 220 Technical Specifications

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

Athlon XP 2400+

The Athlon XP 2400+ is manufactured by AMD. It was released in Agosto 2002 (23 years ago). It is based on the Thorton (2001−2003) architecture. It features 1 cores and 1 threads. Max frequency: 2 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 256 kB. Built on 130 nm process technology. Socket: A. Thermal design power (TDP): 68 Watt. Passmark benchmark score: 305 points. Launch price was $90.

Celeron 220

The Celeron 220 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 2007-01-01. It is based on the Conroe (2006−2007) architecture. It features 1 cores and 1 threads. Base frequency is 1.2 GHz, with boost up to 1.2 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 512 kB. Built on 65 nm process technology. Socket: BGA479. Thermal design power (TDP): 19 Watt. Passmark benchmark score: 320 points. Launch price was $69.

⚡

Processing Power

Both the Athlon XP 2400+ and Celeron 220 share an identical 1-core/1-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 2 GHz on the Athlon XP 2400+ versus 1.2 GHz on the Celeron 220 — a 50% clock advantage for the Athlon XP 2400+. The Athlon XP 2400+ uses the Thorton (2001−2003) architecture (130 nm), while the Celeron 220 uses Conroe (2006−2007) (65 nm). In PassMark, the Athlon XP 2400+ scores 305 against the Celeron 220's 320 — a 4.8% lead for the Celeron 220. Both processors carry 0 kB of L3 cache.

Feature	Athlon XP 2400+	Celeron 220
Cores / Threads	1 / 1	1 / 1
Boost Clock	2 GHz+67%	1.2 GHz
Base Clock	—	1.2 GHz
L3 Cache	0 kB	0 kB
L2 Cache	256 kB	512 kB+100%
Process	130 nm	65 nm-50%
Architecture	Thorton (2001−2003)	Conroe (2006−2007)
PassMark	305	320+5%

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Athlon XP 2400+ uses the A socket (PCIe 1.1), while the Celeron 220 uses BGA479 (PCIe 1.1) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR-266 on the Athlon XP 2400+ versus DDR2-667 on the Celeron 220 — the Celeron 220 supports -350.8% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. Both support up to 4 GB of RAM. Both feature 1-channel memory with ECC support. Both provide 0 PCIe lanes. Chipset compatibility: AMD Socket A (Athlon XP 2400+) and 945G,G31,G41 (Celeron 220).

Feature	Athlon XP 2400+	Celeron 220
Socket	A	BGA479
PCIe Generation	PCIe 1.1	PCIe 1.1
Max RAM Speed	DDR-266	DDR2-667
Max RAM Capacity	4 GB	4 GB
RAM Channels	1	1
ECC Support	Yes	No
PCIe Lanes	0	0

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization: not specified (Athlon XP 2400+) / No (Celeron 220). Primary use case: Celeron 220 targets Budget. Direct competitor: Celeron 220 rivals Athlon 64 3100+.

Feature	Athlon XP 2400+	Celeron 220
Integrated GPU	No	No
Unlocked	—	No
AVX-512	—	No
Virtualization	—	No
Target Use	—	Budget

💰

Value Analysis

At launch, the Athlon XP 2400+ was priced at $193, while the Celeron 220 came in at $42. On launch pricing ($193 vs $42), Celeron 220 was $151 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Athlon XP 2400+ delivers 1.6 pts/$ vs 7.6 pts/$ for the Celeron 220 — making the Celeron 220 the 131.3% better value option.

Feature	Athlon XP 2400+	Celeron 220
MSRP	$193	$42-78%
Performance per Dollar	1.6	7.6+375%
Release Date	2002	2007

Search Athlon XP 2400+ on Amazon

Search Celeron 220 on Amazon

Affiliate Disclosure

ChipVERSUS is a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to Amazon.com. We may earn a commission on qualifying purchases made through our links. This comes at no additional cost to you and helps support our work in providing comprehensive PC building guides and tools.

Amazon and the Amazon logo are trademarks of Amazon.com, Inc. or its affiliates.