Celeron 900
Opteron 144
Celeron 900 vs Opteron 144 Performance Spectrum
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.
Celeron 900 vs Opteron 144 FPS Benchmarks
Predicted gaming performance across popular games. Tested paired with GeForce RTX 5090 to isolate CPU performance.
Search any supported game below to compare 1080p FPS for both components.
Path of Exile 2
Counter-Strike 2
League of Legends
Valorant
Among Us
Apex Legends
ARC Raiders
Baldur's Gate 3
Call of Duty: Black Ops 6
Celeron 900 vs Opteron 144: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict
See where each CPU makes more sense in practice: gaming, heavier work, platform cost, power draw, and upgrade path.
Celeron 900
2009Why buy it
- ✅Draws 35W instead of 85W, a 50W reduction.
Trade-offs
- ❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than Opteron 144, which brings 1 cores / 1 threads.
- ❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 5.6 vs 7.2 PassMark/$ ($86 MSRP vs $65 MSRP).
Opteron 144
2003Why buy it
- ✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 1 cores / 1 threads.
- ✅Costs $21 less on MSRP ($65 MSRP vs $86 MSRP).
- ✅Delivers 26.9% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 7.2 vs 5.6 PassMark/$ ($65 MSRP vs $86 MSRP).
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower PassMark (465 vs 485).
- ❌142.9% higher power demand at 85W vs 35W.
Quick Answers
So, is Celeron 900 better than Opteron 144?
Which one is better for gaming?
Which one is better for streaming, content creation, and heavy multitasking?
Which one is the smarter buy today, not just the cheaper CPU?
Which one is more future-proof for 2026 and beyond?
Celeron 900 vs Opteron 144 Technical Specifications
Side-by-side specs, architecture details, clocks, memory, power, and platform differences.
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.
Opteron 144
The Opteron 144 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in Junho 2003 (22 years ago). It is based on the SledgeHammer (2003−2005) architecture. It features 1 cores and 1 threads. Max frequency: 1.8 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 1 MB. Built on 130 nm process technology. Socket: 940. Thermal design power (TDP): 85 Watt. Passmark benchmark score: 465 points. Launch price was $65.
Processing Power
The Opteron 144 is built on the SledgeHammer (2003−2005) architecture. In PassMark, the Celeron 900 scores 485 against the Opteron 144's 465 — a 4.2% lead for the Celeron 900. L3 cache: 1 MB L2 Cache on the Celeron 900 vs 0 kB on the Opteron 144.
| Feature | Celeron 900 | Opteron 144 |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | — | 1 / 1 |
| Boost Clock | — | 1.8 GHz |
| Base Clock | 2.2 GHz | — |
| L3 Cache | 1 MB L2 Cache | 0 kB |
| L2 Cache | — | 1 MB |
| Process | 45 nm-65% | 130 nm |
| Architecture | — | SledgeHammer (2003−2005) |
| PassMark | 485+4% | 465 |
| Geekbench 6 Single | 220 | — |
| Geekbench 6 Multi | 229 | — |
Memory & Platform
The Celeron 900 uses the PGA478 socket (PCIe 2.0), while the Opteron 144 uses 940 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR3-1333 on the Celeron 900 versus DDR-400 on the Opteron 144 — the Celeron 900 supports -433.2% 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 (Opteron 144). Both provide 0 PCIe lanes.
| Feature | Celeron 900 | Opteron 144 |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | PGA478 | 940 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 2.0 | PCIe 2.0 |
| Max RAM Speed | DDR3-1333 | DDR-400 |
| Max RAM Capacity | 4 GB | 4 GB |
| RAM Channels | 1 | 2+100% |
| ECC Support | No | Yes |
| PCIe Lanes | 0 | 0 |
Advanced Features
Neither processor supports overclocking. Virtualization support: No (Celeron 900) vs AMD-V (Opteron 144). Primary use case: Celeron 900 targets Budget, Opteron 144 targets Server Legacy. Direct competitor: Celeron 900 rivals Pentium 4 2.80.
| Feature | Celeron 900 | Opteron 144 |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | No | No |
| Unlocked | No | No |
| AVX-512 | No | No |
| Virtualization | No | AMD-V |
| Target Use | Budget | Server Legacy |
Value Analysis
At launch, the Celeron 900 was priced at $86, while the Opteron 144 came in at $65. On launch pricing ($86 vs $65), Opteron 144 was $21 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Celeron 900 delivers 5.6 pts/$ vs 7.2 pts/$ for the Opteron 144 — making the Opteron 144 the 23.7% better value option.
| Feature | Celeron 900 | Opteron 144 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $86 | $65-24% |
| Performance per Dollar | 5.6 | 7.2+29% |
| Release Date | 2009 | 2003 |
Affiliate Disclosure
ChipVERSUS is a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to Amazon.com. We may earn a commission on qualifying purchases made through our links. This comes at no additional cost to you and helps support our work in providing comprehensive PC building guides and tools.
Amazon and the Amazon logo are trademarks of Amazon.com, Inc. or its affiliates.
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 Opteron 144
