Celeron 1007U vs Athlon X2 QL-64
Celeron 1007U
Athlon X2 QL-64
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 Celeron 1007U is positioned at rank 99 and the Athlon X2 QL-64 is on rank 665, 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 Celeron 1007U
Performance Per Dollar Athlon X2 QL-64
Performance Comparison
About PassMark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
| Insight | Celeron 1007U | Athlon X2 QL-64 |
|---|---|---|
| Gaming | ❌ Lower gaming performance | ✅ Superior gaming performance |
| Workstation | ❌ Weaker in multi-core tasks | ✅ Better multi-core power |
| Price | ✅ More affordable ($0) | ⚠️ Higher cost ($15) |
| Longevity | 🛑 Legacy (Ivy Bridge (2012−2013) / 22 nm) | 🛑 Legacy (Lion (2008−2009) / 65 nm) |
💎 Value Proposition
| Insight | Celeron 1007U | Athlon X2 QL-64 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ❌ Lower cost efficiency | ❌ Lower cost efficiency |
| Upfront Cost | ✅ More affordable ($0) | ⚠️ Higher cost ($15) |
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 Celeron 1007U and Athlon X2 QL-64
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.
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.
Processing Power
Both the Celeron 1007U and Athlon X2 QL-64 share an identical 2-core/2-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 1.5 GHz on the Celeron 1007U versus 2.1 GHz on the Athlon X2 QL-64 — a 33.3% clock advantage for the Athlon X2 QL-64. The Celeron 1007U uses the Ivy Bridge (2012−2013) architecture (22 nm), while the Athlon X2 QL-64 uses Lion (2008−2009) (65 nm). In PassMark, the Celeron 1007U scores 1,610 against the Athlon X2 QL-64's 1,614 — a 0.2% lead for the Athlon X2 QL-64. L3 cache: 2 MB (total) on the Celeron 1007U vs 0 kB on the Athlon X2 QL-64.
| Feature | Celeron 1007U | Athlon X2 QL-64 |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 2 / 2 | 2 / 2 |
| Boost Clock | 1.5 GHz | 2.1 GHz+40% |
| Base Clock | 1.5 GHz | — |
| L3 Cache | 2 MB (total) | 0 kB |
| L2 Cache | 256K (per core) | 1 MB+300% |
| Process | 22 nm-66% | 65 nm |
| Architecture | Ivy Bridge (2012−2013) | Lion (2008−2009) |
| PassMark | 1,610 | 1,614 |
Memory & Platform
The Celeron 1007U uses the BGA1023 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Athlon X2 QL-64 uses S1 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR3-1600 on the Celeron 1007U versus DDR2-667 on the Athlon X2 QL-64 — 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: 16 (Celeron 1007U) vs 0 (Athlon X2 QL-64) — the Celeron 1007U offers 16 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: Intel FCBGA1023 (Celeron 1007U) and Socket S1 (Athlon X2 QL-64).
| Feature | Celeron 1007U | Athlon X2 QL-64 |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | BGA1023 | S1 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 3.0+50% | PCIe 2.0 |
| Max RAM Speed | DDR3-1600+50% | DDR2-667 |
| Max RAM Capacity | 32 GB+300% | 8 GB |
| RAM Channels | 2 | 2 |
| ECC Support | ❌ | ❌ |
| PCIe Lanes | 16 | 0 |
Advanced Features
Virtualization: not specified (Celeron 1007U) / AMD-V (Athlon X2 QL-64). The Celeron 1007U includes integrated graphics (Intel HD Graphics (Ivy Bridge)), while the Athlon X2 QL-64 requires a dedicated GPU.
| Feature | Celeron 1007U | Athlon X2 QL-64 |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | Yes | No |
| 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 Celeron 1007U and Athlon X2 QL-64
