Celeron 2.70 vs GX-210JA

Performance Spectrum - CPU

Celeron 2.70

1 / 1

408

0.0%

425

+4.2%

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3955WX

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7955WX

Ryzen Threadripper 3990X

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 2.70 is positioned at rank 1025 and the GX-210JA is on rank 1119, so the Celeron 2.70 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 2.70

#1

Ryzen 9 7950X

MSRP: $194|Avg: $20

37421%

#2

Core i9-10900T

MSRP: $120|Avg: $5

35359%

#3

Ryzen 3 PRO 4355GE

MSRP: $423|Avg: $5

25673%

#4

Ryzen Threadripper 3960X

MSRP: $1399|Avg: $85

7734%

#5

Ryzen 9 9950X

MSRP: $649|Avg: $129

6126%

#6

Ryzen 5 8400F

MSRP: $303|Avg: $55

5359%

#7

Ryzen 7 PRO 2700

MSRP: $299|Avg: $60

3070%

#8

Ryzen 5 2600X

MSRP: $229|Avg: $55

3030%

#9

Ryzen 3 PRO 5350G

MSRP: $150|Avg: $60

2758%

#10

Core Ultra 5 245KF

MSRP: $294|Avg: $189

2758%

#11

Ryzen 5 5500

MSRP: $159|Avg: $85

2727%

#12

Ryzen 5 3600

MSRP: $199|Avg: $80

2654%

#13

Core i3-9100E

MSRP: $202|Avg: $30

2617%

#14

Core Ultra 5 245K

MSRP: $319|Avg: $200

2606%

#15

Core i3-8300T

MSRP: $138|Avg: $25

2582%

#396

Ryzen Embedded R2314

MSRP: $300|Avg: $762

92%

#1025

Celeron 2.70

MSRP: $49|Avg: $49

100%

#1027

A10 PRO-7850B

MSRP: $426|Avg: $140

97%

#1028

Core 2 Quad Q8200

MSRP: $224|Avg: $36

97%

#1029

A12-9800E

MSRP: $426|Avg: $150

96%

#1030

Phenom II X6 1065T

MSRP: $426|Avg: $170

96%

#1031

Celeron 440

MSRP: $59|Avg: $10

96%

#1032

A8-3820

MSRP: $280|Avg: $200

93%

#1033

Core i7-860S

MSRP: $299|Avg: $96

93%

#1035

PRO A10-8770E

MSRP: $395|Avg: $210

91%

#1036

Core 2 Duo E4700

MSRP: $133|Avg: $10

91%

#1037

Athlon 64 X2 5800+

MSRP: $230|Avg: $20

91%

#1038

Phenom II X2 B53

MSRP: $150|Avg: $15

91%

#1039

Core 2 Quad Q9300

MSRP: $266|Avg: $27

91%

#1040

Athlon II X4 638

MSRP: $300|Avg: $280

90%

Based on actual market prices and performance synthetic scores.

Performance Per Dollar GX-210JA

#1107

Atom x5-Z8300

MSRP: $20|Avg: N/A

3452%

#1108

Atom Z3735G

MSRP: $17|Avg: N/A

3401%

#1109

Core i5-480M

MSRP: $81|Avg: $77

3122%

#1110

Core i5-460M

MSRP: $80|Avg: $129

3108%

#1111

Core i5-2540M

MSRP: $266|Avg: $10

3080%

#1113

Core i5-450M

MSRP: $32|Avg: $31

2974%

#1114

Core i3-380M

MSRP: $49|Avg: $25

2852%

#1115

Core i5-430M

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $33

2847%

#1116

Core 2 Duo T6600

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $4

2771%

#1119

GX-210JA

MSRP: N/A|Avg: N/A

100%

#1120

VIA Nano U2250

MSRP: $50|Avg: $10

100%

#1121

Core i5-560M

MSRP: $225|Avg: N/A

99%

#1122

Pentium U5600

MSRP: $100|Avg: $50

98%

#1123

Core m5-6Y57

MSRP: $281|Avg: $281

98%

#1125

Core i7-610E

MSRP: $250|Avg: $40

97%

#1126

Core i5-5350U

MSRP: $315|Avg: N/A

97%

#1127

Core i3-4100E

MSRP: $225|Avg: $30

97%

#1128

Pentium Dual Core T4300

MSRP: $150|Avg: $99

97%

#1129

Core i7-3520M

MSRP: $346|Avg: N/A

97%

#1130

Core i3-2310E

MSRP: $225|Avg: $20

96%

#1131

Core i5-2510E

MSRP: $230|Avg: $30

96%

#1132

Core m5-6Y54

MSRP: $281|Avg: $281

96%

#1133

Core i3-2330E

MSRP: $225|Avg: $10

95%

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 GX-210JA (2013) utilizes 28 nm technology and DDR3, providing a fundamental performance advantage.

Insight	Celeron 2.70	GX-210JA
Gaming	✅ Superior gaming performance	❌ Lower gaming performance
Workstation	❌ Weaker in multi-core tasks	✅ Better multi-core power
Price	⚠️ Higher cost ($49)	✅ More affordable ($0)
Longevity	🛑 Legacy (Northwood (2002−2004) / 130 nm)	🛑 Legacy (Temash (2013) / 28 nm)

💎 Value Proposition

The Celeron 2.70 (2003) relies on 130 nm technology and DDR1, DDR2, placing it in a different performance category relative to modern standards.

Insight	Celeron 2.70	GX-210JA
Cost Efficiency	❌ Lower cost efficiency	❌ Lower cost efficiency
Upfront Cost	⚠️ Higher cost ($49)	✅ More affordable ($0)

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 2.70 Benchmark Check

GX-210JA Benchmark Check

Loading...

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of Celeron 2.70 and GX-210JA

Celeron 2.70

The Celeron 2.70 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: 2.7 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: 408 points. Launch price was $69.

GX-210JA

The GX-210JA is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 23 May 2013 (12 years ago). It is based on the Temash (2013) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Max frequency: 1 GHz. L2 cache: 1 MB. Built on 28 nm process technology. Socket: FT3. Thermal design power (TDP): 1 MB. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 425 points. Launch price was $69.

⚡

Processing Power

The Celeron 2.70 packs 1 cores / 1 threads, while the GX-210JA offers 2 cores / 2 threads — the GX-210JA has 1 more core. Boost clocks reach 2.7 GHz on the Celeron 2.70 versus 1 GHz on the GX-210JA — a 91.9% clock advantage for the Celeron 2.70. The Celeron 2.70 uses the Northwood (2002−2004) architecture (130 nm), while the GX-210JA uses Temash (2013) (28 nm). In PassMark, the Celeron 2.70 scores 408 against the GX-210JA's 425 — a 4.1% lead for the GX-210JA.

Feature	Celeron 2.70	GX-210JA
Cores / Threads	1 / 1	2 / 2+100%
Boost Clock	2.7 GHz+170%	1 GHz
L3 Cache	0 kB	—
L2 Cache	128 kB	1 MB+700%
Process	130 nm	28 nm-78%
Architecture	Northwood (2002−2004)	Temash (2013)
PassMark	408	425+4%

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Celeron 2.70 uses the PGA478 socket (PCIe 1.1), while the GX-210JA uses FT3 (PCIe 3.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.

Feature	Celeron 2.70	GX-210JA
Socket	PGA478	FT3
PCIe Generation	PCIe 1.1	PCIe 3.0+173%
Max RAM Speed	DDR1-400	—
Max RAM Capacity	4 GB	—
RAM Channels	1	—
ECC Support	❌	—
PCIe Lanes	0	—

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization: No (Celeron 2.70) / not specified (GX-210JA). Primary use case: Celeron 2.70 targets Budget. Direct competitor: Celeron 2.70 rivals Pentium 4 2.80.