CPU
GPU
Celeron 430
Athlon 64 3100+
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 430 is positioned at rank 1010 and the Athlon 64 3100+ is on rank 1074, so the Celeron 430 offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar Celeron 430
Performance Per Dollar Athlon 64 3100+
Performance Comparison
About PassMark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
| Insight | Celeron 430 | Athlon 64 3100+ |
|---|---|---|
| Gaming | ❌ Lower gaming performance | ✅ Superior gaming performance |
| Workstation | ❌ Weaker in multi-core tasks | ✅ Better multi-core power |
| Price | ✅ More affordable ($10) | ⚠️ Higher cost ($15) |
| Longevity | 🛑 Legacy (Conroe-L (2007−2008) / 65 nm) | 🛑 Legacy (Lima (2008−2009) / 65 nm) |
💎 Value Proposition
| Insight | Celeron 430 | Athlon 64 3100+ |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ✅ Better overall value (+41%) | ❌ Lower cost efficiency |
| Upfront Cost | ✅ More affordable ($10) | ⚠️ Higher cost ($15) |
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 430 and Athlon 64 3100+
Celeron 430
The Celeron 430 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 1.8 GHz, with boost up to 1.8 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 512 kB. Built on 65 nm process technology. Socket: LGA775. Thermal design power (TDP): 35 Watt. Memory support: DDR1, DDR2, DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 448 points. Launch price was $50.
Athlon 64 3100+
The Athlon 64 3100+ is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 2009-01-01. It is based on the Lima (2008−2009) architecture. It features 1 cores and 1 threads. Max frequency: 2 GHz. L2 cache: 512K. Built on 65 nm process technology. Socket: AM2. Thermal design power (TDP): 25 Watt. Memory support: DDR2. Passmark benchmark score: 475 points. Launch price was $149.
Processing Power
Both the Celeron 430 and Athlon 64 3100+ share an identical 1-core/1-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 1.8 GHz on the Celeron 430 versus 2 GHz on the Athlon 64 3100+ — a 10.5% clock advantage for the Athlon 64 3100+. The Celeron 430 uses the Conroe-L (2007−2008) architecture (65 nm), while the Athlon 64 3100+ uses Lima (2008−2009) (65 nm). In PassMark, the Celeron 430 scores 448 against the Athlon 64 3100+'s 475 — a 5.9% lead for the Athlon 64 3100+. Geekbench 6 single-core — the metric most relevant to gaming — records 226 vs 280, a 21.3% lead for the Athlon 64 3100+ that directly translates to higher frame rates.
| Feature | Celeron 430 | Athlon 64 3100+ |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 1 / 1 | 1 / 1 |
| Boost Clock | 1.8 GHz | 2 GHz+11% |
| Base Clock | 1.8 GHz | — |
| L3 Cache | 0 kB | — |
| L2 Cache | 512 kB | 512K |
| Process | 65 nm | 65 nm |
| Architecture | Conroe-L (2007−2008) | Lima (2008−2009) |
| PassMark | 448 | 475+6% |
| Geekbench 6 Single | 226 | 280+24% |
| Geekbench 6 Multi | — | 280 |
Memory & Platform
The Celeron 430 uses the LGA775 socket (PCIe 1.1), while the Athlon 64 3100+ uses AM2 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Both support up to DDR2-800 memory speed. Both support up to 4 GB of RAM. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. PCIe lanes: 0 (Celeron 430) vs 16 (Athlon 64 3100+) — the Athlon 64 3100+ offers 16 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: 945,G31,G41 (Celeron 430) and nForce 500,AMD 690G (Athlon 64 3100+).
| Feature | Celeron 430 | Athlon 64 3100+ |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | LGA775 | AM2 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 1.1 | PCIe 2.0+82% |
| Max RAM Speed | DDR2-800 | DDR2-800 |
| Max RAM Capacity | 4 GB | 4 GB |
| RAM Channels | 2 | 2 |
| ECC Support | ❌ | ❌ |
| PCIe Lanes | 0 | 16 |
Advanced Features
Neither processor supports overclocking. Virtualization support: No (Celeron 430) vs AMD-V (Athlon 64 3100+). Primary use case: Celeron 430 targets Budget, Athlon 64 3100+ targets Legacy Desktop. Direct competitor: Celeron 430 rivals Pentium 4 2.80; Athlon 64 3100+ rivals Celeron D 352.
| Feature | Celeron 430 | Athlon 64 3100+ |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | No | No |
| Unlocked | No | No |
| AVX-512 | No | No |
| Virtualization | No | AMD-V |
| Target Use | Budget | Legacy Desktop |
Value Analysis
The Celeron 430 launched at $49 MSRP, while the Athlon 64 3100+ debuted at $100. At current prices ($10 vs $15), the Celeron 430 is $5 cheaper. In terms of value (PassMark points per dollar), the Celeron 430 delivers 44.8 pts/$ vs 31.7 pts/$ for the Athlon 64 3100+ — making the Celeron 430 the 34.4% better value option.
| Feature | Celeron 430 | Athlon 64 3100+ |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $49-51% | $100 |
| Avg Price (30d) | $10-33% | $15 |
| Performance per Dollar | 44.8+41% | 31.7 |
| Release Date | 2007 | 2008 |
Top Performing CPUs
The most powerful cpus ranked by PassMark CPU Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar CPU comparisons based on Celeron 430 and Athlon 64 3100+
