Celeron 3965U vs Athlon X2 L310
Celeron 3965U
Athlon X2 L310
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 3965U is positioned at rank 265 and the Athlon X2 L310 is on rank 933, so the Celeron 3965U offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar Celeron 3965U
Performance Per Dollar Athlon X2 L310
Performance Comparison
About PassMark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
| Insight | Celeron 3965U | Athlon X2 L310 |
|---|---|---|
| Gaming | ✅ Superior gaming performance | ❌ Lower gaming performance |
| Workstation | ✅ Better multi-core power | ❌ Weaker in multi-core tasks |
| Price | ✅ More affordable ($0) | ⚠️ Higher cost ($20) |
| Longevity | ✨ Modern (Kaby Lake-U (2017) / 14 nm) | 🛑 Legacy (Conesus (2009) / 65 nm) |
💎 Value Proposition
| Insight | Celeron 3965U | Athlon X2 L310 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ❌ Lower cost efficiency | ❌ Lower cost efficiency |
| Upfront Cost | ✅ More affordable ($0) | ⚠️ 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 3965U and Athlon X2 L310
Celeron 3965U
The Celeron 3965U is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 3 January 2017 (8 years ago). It is based on the Kaby Lake-U (2017) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 2.2 GHz, with boost up to 2.2 GHz. L3 cache: 2 MB (total). L2 cache: 256K (per core). Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: BGA1356. Thermal design power (TDP): 15 Watt. Memory support: DDR3, DDR4. Passmark benchmark score: 1,753 points. Launch price was $107.
Athlon X2 L310
The Athlon X2 L310 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 2009-01-01. It is based on the Conesus (2009) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Max frequency: 1.2 GHz. L2 cache: 1 MB. Built on 65 nm process technology. Socket: S1. Thermal design power (TDP): 1 MB. Passmark benchmark score: 1,747 points. Launch price was $149.
Processing Power
Both the Celeron 3965U and Athlon X2 L310 share an identical 2-core/2-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 2.2 GHz on the Celeron 3965U versus 1.2 GHz on the Athlon X2 L310 — a 58.8% clock advantage for the Celeron 3965U. The Celeron 3965U uses the Kaby Lake-U (2017) architecture (14 nm), while the Athlon X2 L310 uses Conesus (2009) (65 nm). In PassMark, the Celeron 3965U scores 1,753 against the Athlon X2 L310's 1,747 — a 0.3% lead for the Celeron 3965U. Geekbench 6 single-core — the metric most relevant to gaming — records 600 vs 120, a 133.3% lead for the Celeron 3965U that directly translates to higher frame rates. Multi-core Geekbench: 1,200 vs 213 (139.7% advantage for the Celeron 3965U).
| Feature | Celeron 3965U | Athlon X2 L310 |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 2 / 2 | 2 / 2 |
| Boost Clock | 2.2 GHz+83% | 1.2 GHz |
| Base Clock | 2.2 GHz | — |
| L3 Cache | 2 MB (total) | — |
| L2 Cache | 256K (per core) | 1 MB+300% |
| Process | 14 nm-78% | 65 nm |
| Architecture | Kaby Lake-U (2017) | Conesus (2009) |
| PassMark | 1,753 | 1,747 |
| Geekbench 6 Single | 600+400% | 120 |
| Geekbench 6 Multi | 1,200+463% | 213 |
Memory & Platform
The Celeron 3965U uses the BGA1356 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Athlon X2 L310 uses S1 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR4-2133 on the Celeron 3965U versus DDR2-667 on the Athlon X2 L310 — the Celeron 3965U supports 66.7% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The Celeron 3965U supports up to 32 GB of RAM compared to 4 GB — 155.6% more capacity for professional workloads. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. PCIe lanes: 10 (Celeron 3965U) vs 0 (Athlon X2 L310) — the Celeron 3965U offers 10 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: SoC (Celeron 3965U) and Socket S1 (Athlon X2 L310).
| Feature | Celeron 3965U | Athlon X2 L310 |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | BGA1356 | S1 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 3.0+50% | PCIe 2.0 |
| Max RAM Speed | DDR4-2133+100% | DDR2-667 |
| Max RAM Capacity | 32 GB+700% | 4 GB |
| RAM Channels | 2 | 2 |
| ECC Support | ❌ | ❌ |
| PCIe Lanes | 10 | 0 |
Advanced Features
Neither processor supports overclocking. Virtualization support: VT-x (Celeron 3965U) vs Yes (Athlon X2 L310). The Celeron 3965U includes integrated graphics (Intel HD Graphics 610), while the Athlon X2 L310 requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Celeron 3965U targets Budget Laptop, Athlon X2 L310 targets Mobile. Direct competitor: Celeron 3965U rivals Pentium Gold 4415U.
| Feature | Celeron 3965U | Athlon X2 L310 |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | Yes | No |
| IGPU Model | Intel HD Graphics 610 | — |
| Unlocked | No | No |
| AVX-512 | No | No |
| Virtualization | VT-x | Yes |
| Target Use | Budget Laptop | Mobile |
Top Performing CPUs
The most powerful cpus ranked by PassMark CPU Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar CPU comparisons based on Celeron 3965U and Athlon X2 L310
