CPU
GPU
Celeron 450
Athlon 64 3200+
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 450 is positioned at rank 1004 and the Athlon 64 3200+ is on rank 1118, so the Celeron 450 offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar Celeron 450
Performance Per Dollar Athlon 64 3200+
Performance Comparison
About PassMark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
| Insight | Celeron 450 | Athlon 64 3200+ |
|---|---|---|
| Gaming | ✅ Superior gaming performance | ❌ Lower gaming performance |
| Workstation | ❌ Weaker in multi-core tasks | ✅ Better multi-core power |
| Price | ✅ More affordable ($5) | ⚠️ Higher cost ($10) |
| Longevity | 🛑 Legacy (Conroe-L (2007−2008) / 65 nm) | 🛑 Legacy (Clawhammer (2001−2005) / 130 nm) |
💎 Value Proposition
| Insight | Celeron 450 | Athlon 64 3200+ |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ✅ Better overall value (+96%) | ❌ Lower cost efficiency |
| Upfront Cost | ✅ More affordable ($5) | ⚠️ Higher cost ($10) |
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 450 and Athlon 64 3200+
Celeron 450
The Celeron 450 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 31 August 2008 (17 years ago). It is based on the Conroe-L (2007−2008) architecture. It features 1 cores and 1 threads. Base frequency is 2.2 GHz, with boost up to 2.2 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: 495 points. Launch price was $53.
Athlon 64 3200+
The Athlon 64 3200+ is manufactured by AMD. It was released in Janeiro 2001 (24 years ago). It is based on the Clawhammer (2001−2005) architecture. It features 1 cores and 1 threads. Max frequency: 2 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 512K. Built on 130 nm process technology. Socket: 754. Thermal design power (TDP): 89 Watt. Passmark benchmark score: 505 points. Launch price was $150.
Processing Power
Both the Celeron 450 and Athlon 64 3200+ share an identical 1-core/1-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 2.2 GHz on the Celeron 450 versus 2 GHz on the Athlon 64 3200+ — a 9.5% clock advantage for the Celeron 450. The Celeron 450 uses the Conroe-L (2007−2008) architecture (65 nm), while the Athlon 64 3200+ uses Clawhammer (2001−2005) (130 nm). In PassMark, the Celeron 450 scores 495 against the Athlon 64 3200+'s 505 — a 2% lead for the Athlon 64 3200+. Both processors carry 0 kB of L3 cache.
| Feature | Celeron 450 | Athlon 64 3200+ |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 1 / 1 | 1 / 1 |
| Boost Clock | 2.2 GHz+10% | 2 GHz |
| Base Clock | 2.2 GHz | — |
| L3 Cache | 0 kB | 0 kB |
| L2 Cache | 512 kB | 512K |
| Process | 65 nm-50% | 130 nm |
| Architecture | Conroe-L (2007−2008) | Clawhammer (2001−2005) |
| PassMark | 495 | 505+2% |
| Geekbench 6 Multi | 269 | — |
Memory & Platform
The Celeron 450 uses the LGA775 socket (PCIe 1.1), while the Athlon 64 3200+ uses 754 (PCIe 1.1) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR2-800 on the Celeron 450 versus DDR1-400 on the Athlon 64 3200+ — the Celeron 450 supports 66.7% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. Both support up to 4 GB of RAM. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. PCIe lanes: 0 (Celeron 450) vs 16 (Athlon 64 3200+) — the Athlon 64 3200+ offers 16 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: 945,G31,G41 (Celeron 450) and Socket 939,Socket 754 (Athlon 64 3200+).
| Feature | Celeron 450 | Athlon 64 3200+ |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | LGA775 | 754 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 1.1 | PCIe 1.1 |
| Max RAM Speed | DDR2-800+100% | DDR1-400 |
| 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 450) vs false (Athlon 64 3200+). Primary use case: Celeron 450 targets Budget. Direct competitor: Celeron 450 rivals Pentium 4 2.80.
| Feature | Celeron 450 | Athlon 64 3200+ |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | No | No |
| Unlocked | No | No |
| AVX-512 | No | No |
| Virtualization | No | false |
| Target Use | Budget | — |
Value Analysis
The Celeron 450 launched at $53 MSRP, while the Athlon 64 3200+ debuted at $417. At current prices ($5 vs $10), the Celeron 450 is $5 cheaper. In terms of value (PassMark points per dollar), the Celeron 450 delivers 99.0 pts/$ vs 50.5 pts/$ for the Athlon 64 3200+ — making the Celeron 450 the 64.9% better value option.
| Feature | Celeron 450 | Athlon 64 3200+ |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $53-87% | $417 |
| Avg Price (30d) | $5-50% | $10 |
| Performance per Dollar | 99.0+96% | 50.5 |
| Release Date | 2008 | 2001 |
Top Performing CPUs
The most powerful cpus ranked by PassMark CPU Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar CPU comparisons based on Celeron 450 and Athlon 64 3200+
