Celeron 1020M vs Athlon Neo MV-40
Celeron 1020M
Athlon Neo MV-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 Celeron 1020M is positioned at rank 170 and the Athlon Neo MV-40 is on rank 1020, so the Celeron 1020M offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar Celeron 1020M
Performance Per Dollar Athlon Neo MV-40
Performance Comparison
About PassMark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
| Insight | Celeron 1020M | Athlon Neo MV-40 |
|---|---|---|
| Gaming | ✅ Superior gaming performance | ❌ Lower gaming performance |
| Workstation | ✅ Better multi-core power | ❌ Weaker in multi-core tasks |
| Price | ✅ More affordable ($0) | ⚠️ Higher cost ($5) |
| Longevity | 🛑 Legacy (Ivy Bridge (2012−2013) / 22 nm) | 🛑 Legacy (Huron (2009) / 65 nm) |
💎 Value Proposition
| Insight | Celeron 1020M | Athlon Neo MV-40 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ❌ Lower cost efficiency | ❌ Lower cost efficiency |
| Upfront Cost | ✅ More affordable ($0) | ⚠️ Higher cost ($5) |
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 1020M and Athlon Neo MV-40
Celeron 1020M
The Celeron 1020M 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 2.1 GHz, with boost up to 2.1 GHz. L3 cache: 2 MB (total). L2 cache: 256K (per core). Built on 22 nm process technology. Socket: PGA988. Thermal design power (TDP): 35 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 1,275 points. Launch price was $86.
Athlon Neo MV-40
The Athlon Neo MV-40 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 2009-01-01. It is based on the Huron (2009) architecture. It features 1 cores and 1 threads. Max frequency: 1.6 GHz. L2 cache: 512 kB. Built on 65 nm process technology. Socket: ASB1. Thermal design power (TDP): 512 kB. Passmark benchmark score: 1,274 points. Launch price was $149.
Processing Power
The Celeron 1020M packs 2 cores / 2 threads, while the Athlon Neo MV-40 offers 1 cores / 1 threads — the Celeron 1020M has 1 more core. Boost clocks reach 2.1 GHz on the Celeron 1020M versus 1.6 GHz on the Athlon Neo MV-40 — a 27% clock advantage for the Celeron 1020M. The Celeron 1020M uses the Ivy Bridge (2012−2013) architecture (22 nm), while the Athlon Neo MV-40 uses Huron (2009) (65 nm). In PassMark, the Celeron 1020M scores 1,275 against the Athlon Neo MV-40's 1,274 — a 0.1% lead for the Celeron 1020M.
| Feature | Celeron 1020M | Athlon Neo MV-40 |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 2 / 2+100% | 1 / 1 |
| Boost Clock | 2.1 GHz+31% | 1.6 GHz |
| Base Clock | 2.1 GHz | — |
| L3 Cache | 2 MB (total) | — |
| L2 Cache | 256K (per core) | 512 kB+100% |
| Process | 22 nm-66% | 65 nm |
| Architecture | Ivy Bridge (2012−2013) | Huron (2009) |
| PassMark | 1,275 | 1,274 |
Memory & Platform
The Celeron 1020M uses the PGA988 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Athlon Neo MV-40 uses ASB1 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR3-1600 on the Celeron 1020M versus DDR2-667 on the Athlon Neo MV-40 — the Celeron 1020M supports 40% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The Celeron 1020M supports up to 32 GB of RAM compared to 4 GB — 155.6% more capacity for professional workloads. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. PCIe lanes: 16 (Celeron 1020M) vs 0 (Athlon Neo MV-40) — the Celeron 1020M offers 16 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: HM77,HM76,HM75 (Celeron 1020M) and AMD ASB1 (Athlon Neo MV-40).
| Feature | Celeron 1020M | Athlon Neo MV-40 |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | PGA988 | ASB1 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 3.0+50% | PCIe 2.0 |
| Max RAM Speed | DDR3-1600+50% | DDR2-667 |
| Max RAM Capacity | 32 GB+700% | 4 GB |
| RAM Channels | 2 | 2 |
| ECC Support | ❌ | ❌ |
| PCIe Lanes | 16 | 0 |
Advanced Features
Virtualization: VT-x (Celeron 1020M) / not specified (Athlon Neo MV-40). The Celeron 1020M includes integrated graphics (HD Graphics (Ivy Bridge)), while the Athlon Neo MV-40 requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Celeron 1020M targets Budget. Direct competitor: Celeron 1020M rivals Pentium 2020M.
| Feature | Celeron 1020M | Athlon Neo MV-40 |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | Yes | No |
| IGPU Model | HD Graphics (Ivy Bridge) | — |
| Unlocked | No | — |
| AVX-512 | No | — |
| Virtualization | VT-x | — |
| Target Use | Budget | — |
Top Performing CPUs
The most powerful cpus ranked by PassMark CPU Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar CPU comparisons based on Celeron 1020M and Athlon Neo MV-40
