Celeron 2.80 vs Athlon 64 2800+
Celeron 2.80
Athlon 64 2800+
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 2.80 is positioned at rank 1076 and the Athlon 64 2800+ is on rank 1098, so the Celeron 2.80 offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar Celeron 2.80
Performance Per Dollar Athlon 64 2800+
Performance Comparison
About PassMark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
| Insight | Celeron 2.80 | Athlon 64 2800+ |
|---|---|---|
| Gaming | ✅ Superior gaming performance | ❌ Lower gaming performance |
| Workstation | ✅ Better multi-core power | ❌ Weaker in multi-core tasks |
| Price | Equivalent pricing | Equivalent pricing |
| Longevity | 🛑 Legacy (Northwood (2002−2004) / 130 nm) | 🛑 Legacy (NewCastle (2004) / 130 nm) |
💎 Value Proposition
| Insight | Celeron 2.80 | Athlon 64 2800+ |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ✅ Better overall value (+2%) | ❌ Lower cost efficiency |
| Upfront Cost | Equivalent pricing | Equivalent pricing |
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 2.80 and Athlon 64 2800+
Celeron 2.80
The Celeron 2.80 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: 2.8 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: 428 points. Launch price was $69.
Athlon 64 2800+
The Athlon 64 2800+ is manufactured by AMD. It was released in Abril 2004 (21 years ago). It is based on the NewCastle (2004) architecture. It features 1 cores and 1 threads. Max frequency: 1.8 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 512 kB. Built on 130 nm process technology. Socket: 754. Thermal design power (TDP): 89 Watt. Passmark benchmark score: 420 points. Launch price was $100.
Processing Power
Both the Celeron 2.80 and Athlon 64 2800+ share an identical 1-core/1-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 2.8 GHz on the Celeron 2.80 versus 1.8 GHz on the Athlon 64 2800+ — a 43.5% clock advantage for the Celeron 2.80. The Celeron 2.80 uses the Northwood (2002−2004) architecture (130 nm), while the Athlon 64 2800+ uses NewCastle (2004) (130 nm). In PassMark, the Celeron 2.80 scores 428 against the Athlon 64 2800+'s 420 — a 1.9% lead for the Celeron 2.80. Both processors carry 0 kB of L3 cache.
| Feature | Celeron 2.80 | Athlon 64 2800+ |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 1 / 1 | 1 / 1 |
| Boost Clock | 2.8 GHz+56% | 1.8 GHz |
| L3 Cache | 0 kB | 0 kB |
| L2 Cache | 128 kB | 512 kB+300% |
| Process | 130 nm | 130 nm |
| Architecture | Northwood (2002−2004) | NewCastle (2004) |
| PassMark | 428+2% | 420 |
Memory & Platform
The Celeron 2.80 uses the PGA478 socket (PCIe 1.1), while the Athlon 64 2800+ uses 754 (PCIe 1.1) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR1-400 on the Celeron 2.80 versus DDR-400 on the Athlon 64 2800+ — the Celeron 2.80 supports -201% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. Both support up to 4 GB of RAM. Both feature 1-channel memory with ECC support. Both provide 0 PCIe lanes. Chipset compatibility: 845,848,865,875 (Celeron 2.80) and AMD 754 (Athlon 64 2800+).
| Feature | Celeron 2.80 | Athlon 64 2800+ |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | PGA478 | 754 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 1.1 | PCIe 1.1 |
| Max RAM Speed | DDR1-400 | DDR-400 |
| Max RAM Capacity | 4 GB | 4 GB |
| RAM Channels | 1 | 1 |
| ECC Support | ❌ | ❌ |
| PCIe Lanes | 0 | 0 |
Advanced Features
Virtualization: No (Celeron 2.80) / not specified (Athlon 64 2800+). Primary use case: Celeron 2.80 targets Budget. Direct competitor: Celeron 2.80 rivals Pentium 4 2.80.
| Feature | Celeron 2.80 | Athlon 64 2800+ |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | No | No |
| Unlocked | No | — |
| AVX-512 | No | — |
| Virtualization | No | — |
| Target Use | Budget | — |
Value Analysis
The Celeron 2.80 launched at $100 MSRP, while the Athlon 64 2800+ debuted at $178. At current prices ($15 vs $15), the Athlon 64 2800+ is $0 cheaper. In terms of value (PassMark points per dollar), the Celeron 2.80 delivers 28.5 pts/$ vs 28.0 pts/$ for the Athlon 64 2800+ — making the Celeron 2.80 the 1.9% better value option.
| Feature | Celeron 2.80 | Athlon 64 2800+ |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $100-44% | $178 |
| Avg Price (30d) | $15 | $15 |
| Performance per Dollar | 28.5+2% | 28.0 |
| Release Date | 2003 | 2004 |
Top Performing CPUs
The most powerful cpus ranked by PassMark CPU Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar CPU comparisons based on Celeron 2.80 and Athlon 64 2800+
