Celeron 2.60 vs Atom N475

Celeron 2.60

1 Cores1 Thrd73 WWMax: 2.6 GHz2003

Atom N475

1 Cores2 Thrd512 WWMax: 1.83 GHz2010

Performance Spectrum - CPU

Celeron 2.60

1 / 1

385

0.0%

405

+5.2%

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 2.60 is positioned at rank 1045 and the Atom N475 is on rank 193, so the Atom N475 offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.

MSRP is the manufacturer's suggested retail price.•
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.

Performance Per Dollar Celeron 2.60

Ryzen 9 7950X

MSRP: $194|Avg: $20

42936%

Core i9-10900T

MSRP: $120|Avg: $5

40570%

Ryzen 3 PRO 4355GE

MSRP: $423|Avg: $5

29457%

Ryzen Threadripper 3960X

MSRP: $1399|Avg: $85

8874%

Ryzen 9 9950X

MSRP: $649|Avg: $129

7029%

Ryzen 5 8400F

MSRP: $303|Avg: $55

6149%

Ryzen 7 PRO 2700

MSRP: $299|Avg: $60

3522%

Ryzen 5 2600X

MSRP: $229|Avg: $55

3476%

Ryzen 3 PRO 5350G

MSRP: $150|Avg: $60

3165%

#10

Core Ultra 5 245KF

MSRP: $294|Avg: $189

3165%

#11

Ryzen 5 5500

MSRP: $159|Avg: $85

3129%

#12

Ryzen 5 3600

MSRP: $199|Avg: $80

3045%

#13

Core i3-9100E

MSRP: $202|Avg: $30

3002%

#14

Core Ultra 5 245K

MSRP: $319|Avg: $200

2990%

#15

Core i3-8300T

MSRP: $138|Avg: $25

2963%

#1045

Celeron 2.60

MSRP: $53|Avg: $10

100%

#1046

Core i7-990X

MSRP: $999|Avg: $225

98%

#1047

Phenom X4 9750B

MSRP: $215|Avg: $34

97%

#1048

Core 2 Duo E8200

MSRP: $163|Avg: $20

97%

#1049

Core 2 Quad Q9450

MSRP: $316|Avg: $15

96%

#1050

Core 2 Duo E8600

MSRP: $200|Avg: $95

95%

#1051

Core 2 Duo E6320

MSRP: $163|Avg: $5

94%

#1052

Core i7-980X

MSRP: $999|Avg: $150

94%

#1053

Athlon 64 X2 3600+

MSRP: $150|Avg: $10

94%

#1054

Core 2 Duo E6420

MSRP: $183|Avg: $10

93%

#1055

Pentium D 940

MSRP: $132|Avg: $15

91%

#1056

Phenom X4 9600B

MSRP: $278|Avg: $20

91%

#1057

Phenom II X3 B77

MSRP: $281|Avg: $35

90%

#1058

Core 2 Duo E6300

MSRP: $163|Avg: $5

89%

#1059

Core 2 Duo E6400

MSRP: $183|Avg: $10

88%

#1060

Core 2 Duo E8300

MSRP: $163|Avg: $20

88%

Based on actual market prices and performance synthetic scores.

Performance Per Dollar Atom N475

#179

Atom x5-Z8300

MSRP: $20|Avg: N/A

362%

#180

Atom Z3735G

MSRP: $17|Avg: N/A

357%

#181

Core i5-480M

MSRP: $81|Avg: $77

328%

#182

Core i5-460M

MSRP: $80|Avg: $129

326%

#183

Core i5-2540M

MSRP: $266|Avg: $10

323%

#185

Core i5-450M

MSRP: $32|Avg: $31

312%

#186

Core i3-380M

MSRP: $49|Avg: $25

299%

#187

Core i5-430M

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $33

299%

#188

Core 2 Duo T6600

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $4

291%

#192

Pentium Gold 4417U

MSRP: $161|Avg: N/A

100%

#193

Atom N475

MSRP: $75|Avg: N/A

100%

Based on actual market prices and performance synthetic scores.

Performance Comparison

About PassMark

🏆 Chipversus Verdict

🚀 Performance Leadership

Generational Difference: This comparison involves processors from different technological eras. The Atom N475 (2010) utilizes 45 nm technology and DDR3, providing a fundamental performance advantage.

Insight	Celeron 2.60	Atom N475
Gaming	✅ Superior gaming performance	❌ Lower gaming performance
Workstation	❌ Weaker in multi-core tasks	✅ Better multi-core power
Price	✅ More affordable ($10)	⚠️ Higher cost ($75)
Longevity	🛑 Legacy (Northwood (2002−2004) / 130 nm)	🛑 Legacy (Pineview (2009−2011) / 45 nm)

💎 Value Proposition

The Celeron 2.60 (2003) relies on 130 nm technology and DDR1, DDR2, placing it in a different performance category relative to modern standards.

Insight	Celeron 2.60	Atom N475
Cost Efficiency	✅ Better overall value (+613%)	❌ Lower cost efficiency
Upfront Cost	✅ More affordable ($10)	⚠️ Higher cost ($75)

Performance Check

Paired with RTX 4090

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.

Celeron 2.60 Benchmark Check

Atom N475 Benchmark Check

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of Celeron 2.60 and Atom N475

Celeron 2.60

The Celeron 2.60 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: 2.6 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: 385 points. Launch price was $69.

Atom N475

The Atom N475 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 1 June 2010 (15 years ago). It is based on the Pineview (2009−2011) architecture. It features 1 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 1.83 GHz, with boost up to 1.83 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 512K (per core). Built on 45 nm process technology. Socket: FCBGA559. Thermal design power (TDP): 6.5 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 405 points. Launch price was $75.

⚡

Processing Power

The Celeron 2.60 packs 1 cores / 1 threads, matching the Atom N475's 1 cores. Boost clocks reach 2.6 GHz on the Celeron 2.60 versus 1.83 GHz on the Atom N475 — a 34.8% clock advantage for the Celeron 2.60. The Celeron 2.60 uses the Northwood (2002−2004) architecture (130 nm), while the Atom N475 uses Pineview (2009−2011) (45 nm). In PassMark, the Celeron 2.60 scores 385 against the Atom N475's 405 — a 5.1% lead for the Atom N475. Both processors carry 0 kB of L3 cache.

Feature	Celeron 2.60	Atom N475
Cores / Threads	1 / 1	1 / 2
Boost Clock	2.6 GHz+42%	1.83 GHz
Base Clock	—	1.83 GHz
L3 Cache	0 kB	0 kB
L2 Cache	128 kB	512K (per core)+300%
Process	130 nm	45 nm-65%
Architecture	Northwood (2002−2004)	Pineview (2009−2011)
PassMark	385	405+5%

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Celeron 2.60 uses the PGA478 socket (PCIe 1.1), while the Atom N475 uses FCBGA559 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR2-400 on the Celeron 2.60 versus DDR3-667 on the Atom N475 — the Atom N475 supports 40% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The Celeron 2.60 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: 845,865,915 (Celeron 2.60) and Intel NM10 (Atom N475).

Feature	Celeron 2.60	Atom N475
Socket	PGA478	FCBGA559
PCIe Generation	PCIe 1.1	PCIe 2.0+82%
Max RAM Speed	DDR2-400	DDR3-667+50%
Max RAM Capacity	4 GB+100%	2 GB
RAM Channels	1	1
ECC Support	❌	❌
PCIe Lanes	0	0

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization: No (Celeron 2.60) / not specified (Atom N475). The Atom N475 includes integrated graphics (Intel GMA 3150), while the Celeron 2.60 requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Celeron 2.60 targets Budget. Direct competitor: Celeron 2.60 rivals Pentium 4 2.40.