Celeron 2.30 vs Athlon XP 2500+
Celeron 2.30
Athlon XP 2500+
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 2.30 is positioned at rank 1092 and the Athlon XP 2500+ is on rank 1105, so the Celeron 2.30 offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar Celeron 2.30
Performance Per Dollar Athlon XP 2500+
Performance Comparison
About PassMark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
| Insight | Celeron 2.30 | Athlon XP 2500+ |
|---|---|---|
| Gaming | ✅ Superior gaming performance | ❌ Lower gaming performance |
| Workstation | ✅ Better multi-core power | ❌ Weaker in multi-core tasks |
| Price | ✅ More affordable ($10) | ⚠️ Higher cost ($15) |
| Longevity | 🛑 Legacy (Northwood (2002−2004) / 130 nm) | 🛑 Legacy (Barton (2001−2004) / 130 nm) |
💎 Value Proposition
| Insight | Celeron 2.30 | Athlon XP 2500+ |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ✅ Better overall value (+52%) | ❌ Lower cost efficiency |
| Upfront Cost | ✅ More affordable ($10) | ⚠️ 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.
Counter-Strike 2
League of Legends
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of Celeron 2.30 and Athlon XP 2500+
Celeron 2.30
The Celeron 2.30 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 2007-01-01. It is based on the Northwood (2002−2004) architecture. It features 1 cores and 1 threads. Max frequency: 2.3 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: 325 points. Launch price was $69.
Athlon XP 2500+
The Athlon XP 2500+ is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 2009-01-01. It is based on the Barton (2001−2004) architecture. It features 1 cores and 1 threads. Max frequency: 1.83 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 512 kB. Built on 130 nm process technology. Socket: A. Thermal design power (TDP): 68 Watt. Passmark benchmark score: 320 points. Launch price was $149.
Processing Power
Both the Celeron 2.30 and Athlon XP 2500+ share an identical 1-core/1-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 2.3 GHz on the Celeron 2.30 versus 1.83 GHz on the Athlon XP 2500+ — a 22.8% clock advantage for the Celeron 2.30. The Celeron 2.30 uses the Northwood (2002−2004) architecture (130 nm), while the Athlon XP 2500+ uses Barton (2001−2004) (130 nm). In PassMark, the Celeron 2.30 scores 325 against the Athlon XP 2500+'s 320 — a 1.6% lead for the Celeron 2.30. Both processors carry 0 kB of L3 cache.
| Feature | Celeron 2.30 | Athlon XP 2500+ |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 1 / 1 | 1 / 1 |
| Boost Clock | 2.3 GHz+26% | 1.83 GHz |
| L3 Cache | 0 kB | 0 kB |
| L2 Cache | 128 kB | 512 kB+300% |
| Process | 130 nm | 130 nm |
| Architecture | Northwood (2002−2004) | Barton (2001−2004) |
| PassMark | 325+2% | 320 |
Memory & Platform
The Celeron 2.30 uses the PGA478 socket (PCIe 1.1), while the Athlon XP 2500+ uses A (PCIe 1.1) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR1-400 on the Celeron 2.30 versus DDR-400 on the Athlon XP 2500+ — the Celeron 2.30 supports -201% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The Celeron 2.30 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. Chipset compatibility: 845,850,865 (Celeron 2.30) and Socket A (Athlon XP 2500+).
| Feature | Celeron 2.30 | Athlon XP 2500+ |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | PGA478 | A |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 1.1 | PCIe 1.1 |
| Max RAM Speed | DDR1-400 | DDR-400 |
| Max RAM Capacity | 4 GB+100% | 2 GB |
| RAM Channels | 1 | 1 |
| ECC Support | ❌ | ❌ |
| PCIe Lanes | 0 | — |
Advanced Features
Neither processor supports overclocking. Virtualization support: No (Celeron 2.30) vs false (Athlon XP 2500+). Primary use case: Celeron 2.30 targets Budget. Direct competitor: Celeron 2.30 rivals Pentium 4 2.40.
| Feature | Celeron 2.30 | Athlon XP 2500+ |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | No | No |
| Unlocked | No | No |
| AVX-512 | No | No |
| Virtualization | No | false |
| Target Use | Budget | — |
Value Analysis
The Celeron 2.30 launched at $100 MSRP, while the Athlon XP 2500+ debuted at $172. At current prices ($10 vs $15), the Celeron 2.30 is $5 cheaper. In terms of value (PassMark points per dollar), the Celeron 2.30 delivers 32.5 pts/$ vs 21.3 pts/$ for the Athlon XP 2500+ — making the Celeron 2.30 the 41.5% better value option.
| Feature | Celeron 2.30 | Athlon XP 2500+ |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $100-42% | $172 |
| Avg Price (30d) | $10-33% | $15 |
| Performance per Dollar | 32.5+53% | 21.3 |
| Release Date | 2003 | 2003 |
Top Performing CPUs
The most powerful cpus ranked by PassMark CPU Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar CPU comparisons based on Celeron 2.30 and Athlon XP 2500+
