Athlon XP 2700+ vs Celeron 2.40
Athlon XP 2700+
Celeron 2.40
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 XP 2700+ is positioned at rank 1124 and the Celeron 2.40 is on rank 1072, so the Celeron 2.40 offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar Athlon XP 2700+
Performance Per Dollar Celeron 2.40
Performance Comparison
About PassMark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
| Insight | Athlon XP 2700+ | Celeron 2.40 |
|---|---|---|
| Gaming | ❌ Lower gaming performance | ✅ Superior gaming performance |
| Workstation | ✅ Better multi-core power | ❌ Weaker in multi-core tasks |
| Price | ⚠️ Higher cost ($20) | ✅ More affordable ($13) |
| Longevity | 🛑 Legacy (Thoroughbred (2001−2002) / 130 nm) | 🛑 Legacy (NetBurst (2000−2006) / 130 nm) |
💎 Value Proposition
| Insight | Athlon XP 2700+ | Celeron 2.40 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ❌ Lower cost efficiency | ✅ Better overall value (+47%) |
| Upfront Cost | ⚠️ Higher cost ($20) | ✅ More affordable ($13) |
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 XP 2700+ and Celeron 2.40
Athlon XP 2700+
The Athlon XP 2700+ is manufactured by AMD. It was released in Outubro 2002 (23 years ago). It is based on the Thoroughbred (2001−2002) architecture. It features 1 cores and 1 threads. Max frequency: 2.17 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: 360 points. Launch price was $85.
Celeron 2.40
The Celeron 2.40 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 2007-01-01. It is based on the NetBurst (2000−2006) architecture. It features 1 cores and 1 threads. Max frequency: 2.4 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 128 kB. Built on 130 nm process technology. Socket: PGA478. Thermal design power (TDP): 73 Watt. Memory support: DDR1, DDR2. Passmark benchmark score: 345 points. Launch price was $69.
Processing Power
Both the Athlon XP 2700+ and Celeron 2.40 share an identical 1-core/1-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 2.17 GHz on the Athlon XP 2700+ versus 2.4 GHz on the Celeron 2.40 — a 10.1% clock advantage for the Celeron 2.40. The Athlon XP 2700+ uses the Thoroughbred (2001−2002) architecture (130 nm), while the Celeron 2.40 uses NetBurst (2000−2006) (130 nm). In PassMark, the Athlon XP 2700+ scores 360 against the Celeron 2.40's 345 — a 4.3% lead for the Athlon XP 2700+. Both processors carry 0 kB of L3 cache.
| Feature | Athlon XP 2700+ | Celeron 2.40 |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 1 / 1 | 1 / 1 |
| Boost Clock | 2.17 GHz | 2.4 GHz+11% |
| L3 Cache | 0 kB | 0 kB |
| L2 Cache | 256 kB+100% | 128 kB |
| Process | 130 nm | 130 nm |
| Architecture | Thoroughbred (2001−2002) | NetBurst (2000−2006) |
| PassMark | 360+4% | 345 |
| Geekbench 6 Single | — | 150 |
| Geekbench 6 Multi | — | 150 |
Memory & Platform
The Athlon XP 2700+ uses the A socket (PCIe 1.1), while the Celeron 2.40 uses PGA478 (PCIe 1.1) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR-333 on the Athlon XP 2700+ versus DDR1-333 on the Celeron 2.40 — the Celeron 2.40 supports -201.2% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The Athlon XP 2700+ supports up to 4 GB of RAM compared to 2 GB — 66.7% more capacity for professional workloads. Both feature 1-channel memory with ECC support. Both provide 0 PCIe lanes. Chipset compatibility: AMD Socket A (Athlon XP 2700+) and Intel 845,Intel 865 (Celeron 2.40).
| Feature | Athlon XP 2700+ | Celeron 2.40 |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | A | PGA478 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 1.1 | PCIe 1.1 |
| Max RAM Speed | DDR-333 | DDR1-333 |
| Max RAM Capacity | 4 GB+100% | 2 GB |
| RAM Channels | 1 | 1 |
| ECC Support | ✅ | ❌ |
| PCIe Lanes | 0 | 0 |
Advanced Features
Virtualization: not specified (Athlon XP 2700+) / None (Celeron 2.40). Primary use case: Celeron 2.40 targets Legacy Desktop. Direct competitor: Celeron 2.40 rivals Pentium 4 2.40.
| Feature | Athlon XP 2700+ | Celeron 2.40 |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | No | No |
| IGPU Model | — | None |
| Unlocked | — | No |
| AVX-512 | — | No |
| Virtualization | — | None |
| Target Use | — | Legacy Desktop |
Value Analysis
The Athlon XP 2700+ launched at $349 MSRP, while the Celeron 2.40 debuted at $69. At current prices ($20 vs $13), the Celeron 2.40 is $7 cheaper. In terms of value (PassMark points per dollar), the Athlon XP 2700+ delivers 18.0 pts/$ vs 26.5 pts/$ for the Celeron 2.40 — making the Celeron 2.40 the 38.3% better value option.
| Feature | Athlon XP 2700+ | Celeron 2.40 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $349 | $69-80% |
| Avg Price (30d) | $20 | $13-35% |
| Performance per Dollar | 18.0 | 26.5+47% |
| Release Date | 2002 | 2003 |
Top Performing CPUs
The most powerful cpus ranked by PassMark CPU Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar CPU comparisons based on Athlon XP 2700+ and Celeron 2.40
