Celeron 420 vs Athlon 64 2800+
Celeron 420
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 420 is positioned at rank 982 and the Athlon 64 2800+ is on rank 1098, so the Celeron 420 offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar Celeron 420
Performance Per Dollar Athlon 64 2800+
Performance Comparison
About PassMark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
| Insight | Celeron 420 | Athlon 64 2800+ |
|---|---|---|
| Gaming | ❌ Lower gaming performance | ✅ Superior gaming performance |
| Workstation | ✅ Better multi-core power | ❌ Weaker in multi-core tasks |
| Price | Equivalent pricing | Equivalent pricing |
| Longevity | 🛑 Legacy (Conroe-L (2007−2008) / 65 nm) | 🛑 Legacy (NewCastle (2004) / 130 nm) |
💎 Value Proposition
| Insight | Celeron 420 | Athlon 64 2800+ |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ✅ Better overall value (+1%) | ❌ 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 420 and Athlon 64 2800+
Celeron 420
The Celeron 420 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 3 June 2007 (18 years ago). It is based on the Conroe-L (2007−2008) architecture. It features 1 cores and 1 threads. Base frequency is 1.6 GHz, with boost up to 1.6 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 512 kB (total). Built on 65 nm process technology. Socket: LGA775. Thermal design power (TDP): 35 Watt. Memory support: DDR1, DDR2, DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 425 points. Launch price was $23.
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 420 and Athlon 64 2800+ share an identical 1-core/1-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 1.6 GHz on the Celeron 420 versus 1.8 GHz on the Athlon 64 2800+ — a 11.8% clock advantage for the Athlon 64 2800+. The Celeron 420 uses the Conroe-L (2007−2008) architecture (65 nm), while the Athlon 64 2800+ uses NewCastle (2004) (130 nm). In PassMark, the Celeron 420 scores 425 against the Athlon 64 2800+'s 420 — a 1.2% lead for the Celeron 420. Both processors carry 0 kB of L3 cache.
| Feature | Celeron 420 | Athlon 64 2800+ |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 1 / 1 | 1 / 1 |
| Boost Clock | 1.6 GHz | 1.8 GHz+12% |
| Base Clock | 1.6 GHz | — |
| L3 Cache | 0 kB | 0 kB |
| L2 Cache | 512 kB (total) | 512 kB |
| Process | 65 nm-50% | 130 nm |
| Architecture | Conroe-L (2007−2008) | NewCastle (2004) |
| PassMark | 425+1% | 420 |
Memory & Platform
The Celeron 420 uses the LGA775 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 DDR2-800 on the Celeron 420 versus DDR-400 on the Athlon 64 2800+ — the Celeron 420 supports -202% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The Celeron 420 supports up to 16 GB of RAM compared to 4 GB — 120% more capacity for professional workloads. Memory channels: 2 (Celeron 420) vs 1 (Athlon 64 2800+). Both provide 0 PCIe lanes. Chipset compatibility: 945,G31,G41 (Celeron 420) and AMD 754 (Athlon 64 2800+).
| Feature | Celeron 420 | Athlon 64 2800+ |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | LGA775 | 754 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 1.1 | PCIe 1.1 |
| Max RAM Speed | DDR2-800 | DDR-400 |
| Max RAM Capacity | 16 GB+300% | 4 GB |
| RAM Channels | 2+100% | 1 |
| ECC Support | ❌ | ❌ |
| PCIe Lanes | 0 | 0 |
Advanced Features
Virtualization: No (Celeron 420) / not specified (Athlon 64 2800+). Primary use case: Celeron 420 targets Budget. Direct competitor: Celeron 420 rivals Pentium 4 2.80.
| Feature | Celeron 420 | Athlon 64 2800+ |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | No | No |
| Unlocked | No | — |
| AVX-512 | No | — |
| Virtualization | No | — |
| Target Use | Budget | — |
Value Analysis
The Celeron 420 launched at $39 MSRP, while the Athlon 64 2800+ debuted at $178. At current prices ($15 vs $15), the Athlon 64 2800+ is $0 cheaper. In terms of value (PassMark points per dollar), the Celeron 420 delivers 28.3 pts/$ vs 28.0 pts/$ for the Athlon 64 2800+ — making the Celeron 420 the 1.2% better value option.
| Feature | Celeron 420 | Athlon 64 2800+ |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $39-78% | $178 |
| Avg Price (30d) | $15 | $15 |
| Performance per Dollar | 28.3+1% | 28.0 |
| Release Date | 2007 | 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 420 and Athlon 64 2800+
