Chipversus Index
Jump to Section

Celeron 2.70 vs Mobile Athlon 64 2700+

CPUCPUGPUGPU
Intel

Celeron 2.70

1 Cores1 Thrd73 WWMax: 2.7 GHz2003
Similar parts
·······
Buy on Amazon
VS
AMD

Mobile Athlon 64 2700+

1 Cores1 Thrd512 WWMax: 1.6 GHz2005
Similar parts
·······
Buy on Amazon

Celeron 2.70 vs Mobile Athlon 64 2700+ Performance Spectrum

Celeron 2.70
1 / 1
408
+0.7%
brand logoPentium III 1400S
brand logoAtom N270
brand logoPentium M 1.30
brand logoCore Solo T1200
brand logoCore i9-10900F
brand logoXeon W-3335
brand logoXeon w7-3545
brand logoXeon w9-3575X
Mobile Athlon 64 2700+
1 / 1
405
0.0%
brand logoAthlon XP 1800+
brand logoAthlon XP 2100+
brand logoAthlon XP 2400+
brand logoAthlon XP 2700+
brand logoRyzen AI 5 340
brand logoRyzen Threadripper PRO 3955WX
brand logoRyzen Threadripper PRO 7955WX
brand logoRyzen 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.

Celeron 2.70 vs Mobile Athlon 64 2700+ FPS Benchmarks

Predicted gaming performance across popular games. Tested paired with GeForce RTX 5090 to isolate CPU performance.

Search any supported game below to compare 1080p FPS for both components.

Path of Exile 2

Path of Exile 2

1080P
Celeron 2.70
low10 FPS
medium10 FPS
high10 FPS
ultra10 FPS
1080P
Mobile Athlon 64 2700+
low10 FPS
medium10 FPS
high10 FPS
ultra10 FPS
Counter-Strike 2

Counter-Strike 2

1080P
Celeron 2.70
low10 FPS
medium10 FPS
high10 FPS
ultra10 FPS
1080P
Mobile Athlon 64 2700+
low10 FPS
medium10 FPS
high10 FPS
ultra10 FPS
League of Legends

League of Legends

1080P
Celeron 2.70
low10 FPS
medium10 FPS
high10 FPS
ultra10 FPS
1080P
Mobile Athlon 64 2700+
low10 FPS
medium10 FPS
high10 FPS
ultra10 FPS
Valorant

Valorant

1080P
Celeron 2.70
low10 FPS
medium10 FPS
high10 FPS
ultra10 FPS
1080P
Mobile Athlon 64 2700+
low10 FPS
medium10 FPS
high10 FPS
ultra10 FPS
Among Us

Among Us

1080P
Celeron 2.70
low10 FPS
medium10 FPS
high10 FPS
ultra10 FPS
1080P
Mobile Athlon 64 2700+
low10 FPS
medium10 FPS
high10 FPS
ultra10 FPS
Apex Legends

Apex Legends

1080P
Celeron 2.70
low10 FPS
medium10 FPS
high10 FPS
ultra10 FPS
1080P
Mobile Athlon 64 2700+
low10 FPS
medium10 FPS
high10 FPS
ultra10 FPS
ARC Raiders

ARC Raiders

1080P
Celeron 2.70
low10 FPS
medium10 FPS
high10 FPS
ultra10 FPS
1080P
Mobile Athlon 64 2700+
low10 FPS
medium10 FPS
high10 FPS
ultra10 FPS
Baldur's Gate 3

Baldur's Gate 3

1080P
Celeron 2.70
low10 FPS
medium10 FPS
high10 FPS
ultra10 FPS
1080P
Mobile Athlon 64 2700+
low10 FPS
medium10 FPS
high10 FPS
ultra10 FPS
Call of Duty: Black Ops 6

Call of Duty: Black Ops 6

1080P
Celeron 2.70
low10 FPS
medium10 FPS
high10 FPS
ultra10 FPS
1080P
Mobile Athlon 64 2700+
low10 FPS
medium10 FPS
high10 FPS
ultra10 FPS
Call of Duty: Warzone

Call of Duty: Warzone

1080P
Celeron 2.70
low10 FPS
medium10 FPS
high10 FPS
ultra10 FPS
1080P
Mobile Athlon 64 2700+
low10 FPS
medium10 FPS
high10 FPS
ultra10 FPS
Check FPS with Custom Builds

Celeron 2.70 vs Mobile Athlon 64 2700+: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

See where each CPU makes more sense in practice: gaming, heavier work, platform cost, power draw, and upgrade path.

Celeron 2.70

2003

Why buy it

  • ✅Draws 73W instead of 512W, a 439W reduction.

Trade-offs

  • ❌Launch MSRP is still $49 MSRP, while Mobile Athlon 64 2700+ mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.

Mobile Athlon 64 2700+

2005

Why buy it

    Trade-offs

    • ❌Lower PassMark (405 vs 408).
    • ❌601.4% higher power demand at 512W vs 73W.

    Quick Answers

    So, is Celeron 2.70 better than Mobile Athlon 64 2700+?
    Yes. Celeron 2.70 is the better all-around CPU here. It gives you 0.7% better PassMark, which is enough to make it the stronger overall pick.
    Which one is better for gaming?
    If gaming is the priority, Celeron 2.70 has the edge because it leads the single-thread side of this matchup with 68.8% higher max boost clock.
    Which one is better for streaming, content creation, and heavy multitasking?
    For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Celeron 2.70 is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.7% better PassMark, backed by 1 cores and 1 threads.
    Which one is the smarter buy today, not just the cheaper CPU?
    Celeron 2.70 is the better buy right now. Celeron 2.70 comes in at an unclear MSRP at $49 MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it still gives you 0.7% higher PassMark. It is also 100.0% better value on MSRP (8.3 vs 0.0 PassMark/$), so you are getting the faster CPU without taking a value hit on paper.
    Which one is more future-proof for 2026 and beyond?
    Mobile Athlon 64 2700+ makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2005 vs 2003). That makes it the safer long-term bet.

    Celeron 2.70 vs Mobile Athlon 64 2700+ Technical Specifications

    Side-by-side specs, architecture details, clocks, memory, power, and platform differences.

    Intel

    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.

    AMD

    Mobile Athlon 64 2700+

    The Mobile Athlon 64 2700+ is manufactured by AMD. It was released in Agosto 2005 (20 years ago). It is based on the Clawhammer (2001−2005) architecture. It features 1 cores and 1 threads. Max frequency: 1.6 GHz. L2 cache: 512K. Socket: 754. Thermal design power (TDP): 512 kB. Memory support: DDR1. Passmark benchmark score: 405 points. Launch price was $69.

    ⚡

    Processing Power

    Both the Celeron 2.70 and Mobile Athlon 64 2700+ share an identical 1-core/1-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 2.7 GHz on the Celeron 2.70 versus 1.6 GHz on the Mobile Athlon 64 2700+ — a 51.2% clock advantage for the Celeron 2.70. The Celeron 2.70 uses the Northwood (2002−2004) architecture (130 nm), while the Mobile Athlon 64 2700+ uses Clawhammer (2001−2005). In PassMark, the Celeron 2.70 scores 408 against the Mobile Athlon 64 2700+'s 405 — a 0.7% lead for the Celeron 2.70.

    FeatureCeleron 2.70Mobile Athlon 64 2700+
    Cores / Threads
    1 / 1
    1 / 1
    Boost Clock
    2.7 GHz+69%
    1.6 GHz
    L3 Cache
    0 kB
    —
    L2 Cache
    128 kB
    512K+300%
    Process
    130 nm
    —
    Architecture
    Northwood (2002−2004)
    Clawhammer (2001−2005)
    PassMark
    408
    405
    🧠

    Memory & Platform

    The Celeron 2.70 uses the PGA478 socket (PCIe 1.1), while the Mobile Athlon 64 2700+ uses 754 (PCIe 1.1) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Both support up to DDR1-400 memory speed. The Celeron 2.70 supports up to 4 GB of RAM compared to 2 GB — 100% more capacity for professional workloads. Both feature 1-channel memory with ECC support. Both provide 0 PCIe lanes. Chipset compatibility: 845,848,865,875 (Celeron 2.70) and 754 (Mobile Athlon 64 2700+).

    FeatureCeleron 2.70Mobile Athlon 64 2700+
    Socket
    PGA478
    754
    PCIe Generation
    PCIe 1.1
    PCIe 1.1
    Max RAM Speed
    DDR1-400
    400
    Max RAM Capacity
    4 GB+100%
    2 GB
    RAM Channels
    1
    1
    ECC Support
    No
    No
    PCIe Lanes
    0
    0
    🔧

    Advanced Features

    Neither processor supports overclocking. Virtualization support: No (Celeron 2.70) vs false (Mobile Athlon 64 2700+). Primary use case: Celeron 2.70 targets Budget. Direct competitor: Celeron 2.70 rivals Pentium 4 2.80; Mobile Athlon 64 2700+ rivals Pentium M 715.

    FeatureCeleron 2.70Mobile Athlon 64 2700+
    Integrated GPU
    No
    No
    IGPU Model
    —
    None
    Unlocked
    No
    No
    AVX-512
    No
    No
    Virtualization
    No
    false
    Target Use
    Budget
    —