CPU
GPU
Celeron 900
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 900 is positioned at rank 1193 and the Athlon 64 3100+ is on rank 1074, so the Athlon 64 3100+ offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar Celeron 900
Performance Per Dollar Athlon 64 3100+
Performance Comparison
About PassMark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
| Insight | Celeron 900 | Athlon 64 3100+ |
|---|---|---|
| Gaming | ❌ Lower gaming performance | ✅ Superior gaming performance |
| Workstation | ✅ Better multi-core power | ❌ Weaker in multi-core tasks |
| Price | ✅ More affordable ($5) | ⚠️ Higher cost ($15) |
| Longevity | 🛑 Legacy (Legacy / 45 nm) | 🛑 Legacy (Lima (2008−2009) / 65 nm) |
💎 Value Proposition
| Insight | Celeron 900 | Athlon 64 3100+ |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ✅ Better overall value (+206%) | ❌ Lower cost efficiency |
| Upfront Cost | ✅ More affordable ($5) | ⚠️ 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 900 and Athlon 64 3100+
Celeron 900
The Celeron 900 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 2007-01-01. Base frequency: 2.2 GHz. L3 cache: 1 MB L2 Cache. Built on 45 nm process technology. Socket: PGA478. Thermal design power (TDP): 35 Watt. Passmark benchmark score: 485 points. Launch price was $69.
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
The Athlon 64 3100+ is built on the Lima (2008−2009) architecture. In PassMark, the Celeron 900 scores 485 against the Athlon 64 3100+'s 475 — a 2.1% lead for the Celeron 900. Geekbench 6 single-core — the metric most relevant to gaming — records 220 vs 280, a 24% lead for the Athlon 64 3100+ that directly translates to higher frame rates. Multi-core Geekbench: 229 vs 280 (20% advantage for the Athlon 64 3100+).
| Feature | Celeron 900 | Athlon 64 3100+ |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | — | 1 / 1 |
| Boost Clock | — | 2 GHz |
| Base Clock | 2.2 GHz | — |
| L3 Cache | 1 MB L2 Cache | — |
| L2 Cache | — | 512K |
| Process | 45 nm-31% | 65 nm |
| Architecture | — | Lima (2008−2009) |
| PassMark | 485+2% | 475 |
| Geekbench 6 Single | 220 | 280+27% |
| Geekbench 6 Multi | 229 | 280+22% |
Memory & Platform
The Celeron 900 uses the PGA478 socket (PCIe 2.0), while the Athlon 64 3100+ uses AM2 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR3-1333 on the Celeron 900 versus DDR2-800 on the Athlon 64 3100+ — the Celeron 900 supports 40% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. Both support up to 4 GB of RAM. Memory channels: 1 (Celeron 900) vs 2 (Athlon 64 3100+). PCIe lanes: 0 (Celeron 900) vs 16 (Athlon 64 3100+) — the Athlon 64 3100+ offers 16 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: GL40,GM45 (Celeron 900) and nForce 500,AMD 690G (Athlon 64 3100+).
| Feature | Celeron 900 | Athlon 64 3100+ |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | PGA478 | AM2 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 2.0 | PCIe 2.0 |
| Max RAM Speed | DDR3-1333+50% | DDR2-800 |
| Max RAM Capacity | 4 GB | 4 GB |
| RAM Channels | 1 | 2+100% |
| ECC Support | ❌ | ❌ |
| PCIe Lanes | 0 | 16 |
Advanced Features
Neither processor supports overclocking. Virtualization support: No (Celeron 900) vs AMD-V (Athlon 64 3100+). Primary use case: Celeron 900 targets Budget, Athlon 64 3100+ targets Legacy Desktop. Direct competitor: Celeron 900 rivals Pentium 4 2.80; Athlon 64 3100+ rivals Celeron D 352.
| Feature | Celeron 900 | 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 900 launched at $86 MSRP, while the Athlon 64 3100+ debuted at $100. At current prices ($5 vs $15), the Celeron 900 is $10 cheaper. In terms of value (PassMark points per dollar), the Celeron 900 delivers 97.0 pts/$ vs 31.7 pts/$ for the Athlon 64 3100+ — making the Celeron 900 the 101.6% better value option.
| Feature | Celeron 900 | Athlon 64 3100+ |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $86-14% | $100 |
| Avg Price (30d) | $5-67% | $15 |
| Performance per Dollar | 97.0+206% | 31.7 |
| Release Date | 2009 | 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 900 and Athlon 64 3100+
