Celeron 2.80 vs Opteron 142
Celeron 2.80
Opteron 142
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 Opteron 142 is on rank 1025, so the Opteron 142 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 Opteron 142
Performance Comparison
About PassMark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
| Insight | Celeron 2.80 | Opteron 142 |
|---|---|---|
| Gaming | ✅ Superior gaming performance | ❌ Lower gaming performance |
| Workstation | ❌ Weaker in multi-core tasks | ✅ Better multi-core power |
| Price | ✅ More affordable ($15) | ⚠️ Higher cost ($20) |
| Longevity | 🛑 Legacy (Northwood (2002−2004) / 130 nm) | 🛑 Legacy (SledgeHammer (2003−2005) / 130 nm) |
💎 Value Proposition
| Insight | Celeron 2.80 | Opteron 142 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ✅ Better overall value (+28%) | ❌ Lower cost efficiency |
| Upfront Cost | ✅ More affordable ($15) | ⚠️ Higher cost ($20) |
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 Opteron 142
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.
Opteron 142
The Opteron 142 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 2015-01-01. It is based on the SledgeHammer (2003−2005) architecture. It features 1 cores and 1 threads. Max frequency: 1.6 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 1 MB. Built on 130 nm process technology. Socket: 940. Thermal design power (TDP): 85 Watt. Passmark benchmark score: 445 points. Launch price was $800.
Processing Power
Both the Celeron 2.80 and Opteron 142 share an identical 1-core/1-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 2.8 GHz on the Celeron 2.80 versus 1.6 GHz on the Opteron 142 — a 54.5% clock advantage for the Celeron 2.80. The Celeron 2.80 uses the Northwood (2002−2004) architecture (130 nm), while the Opteron 142 uses SledgeHammer (2003−2005) (130 nm). In PassMark, the Celeron 2.80 scores 428 against the Opteron 142's 445 — a 3.9% lead for the Opteron 142. Both processors carry 0 kB of L3 cache.
| Feature | Celeron 2.80 | Opteron 142 |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 1 / 1 | 1 / 1 |
| Boost Clock | 2.8 GHz+75% | 1.6 GHz |
| L3 Cache | 0 kB | 0 kB |
| L2 Cache | 128 kB | 1 MB+700% |
| Process | 130 nm | 130 nm |
| Architecture | Northwood (2002−2004) | SledgeHammer (2003−2005) |
| PassMark | 428 | 445+4% |
Memory & Platform
The Celeron 2.80 uses the PGA478 socket (PCIe 1.1), while the Opteron 142 uses 940 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR1-400 on the Celeron 2.80 versus DDR-333 on the Opteron 142 — the Celeron 2.80 supports -201.2% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The Opteron 142 supports up to 8 GB of RAM compared to 4 GB — 66.7% more capacity for professional workloads. Memory channels: 1 (Celeron 2.80) vs 2 (Opteron 142). Both provide 0 PCIe lanes.
| Feature | Celeron 2.80 | Opteron 142 |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | PGA478 | 940 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 1.1 | PCIe 2.0+82% |
| Max RAM Speed | DDR1-400 | DDR-333 |
| Max RAM Capacity | 4 GB | 8 GB+100% |
| RAM Channels | 1 | 2+100% |
| ECC Support | ❌ | ✅ |
| PCIe Lanes | 0 | 0 |
Advanced Features
Neither processor supports overclocking. Virtualization support: No (Celeron 2.80) vs AMD-V (Opteron 142). Primary use case: Celeron 2.80 targets Budget, Opteron 142 targets Server. Direct competitor: Celeron 2.80 rivals Pentium 4 2.80.
| Feature | Celeron 2.80 | Opteron 142 |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | No | No |
| Unlocked | No | No |
| AVX-512 | No | No |
| Virtualization | No | AMD-V |
| Target Use | Budget | Server |
Value Analysis
The Celeron 2.80 launched at $100 MSRP, while the Opteron 142 debuted at $292. At current prices ($15 vs $20), the Celeron 2.80 is $5 cheaper. In terms of value (PassMark points per dollar), the Celeron 2.80 delivers 28.5 pts/$ vs 22.3 pts/$ for the Opteron 142 — making the Celeron 2.80 the 24.7% better value option.
| Feature | Celeron 2.80 | Opteron 142 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $100-66% | $292 |
| Avg Price (30d) | $15-25% | $20 |
| Performance per Dollar | 28.5+28% | 22.3 |
| 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 2.80 and Opteron 142
