Celeron 900
Turion 64 ML-30
Celeron 900 vs Turion 64 ML-30 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 Turion 64 ML-30 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
Call of Duty: Warzone
Civilization VI
Celeron 900 vs Turion 64 ML-30: 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
Trade-offs
- ❌Launch MSRP is still $86 MSRP, while Turion 64 ML-30 mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
- ❌3400% higher power demand at 35W vs 1W.
Turion 64 ML-30
2005Why buy it
- ✅Draws 1W instead of 35W, a 34W reduction.
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower PassMark (475 vs 485).
Quick Answers
So, is Celeron 900 better than Turion 64 ML-30?
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 Turion 64 ML-30 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.
Turion 64 ML-30
The Turion 64 ML-30 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 2007-01-01. It is based on the Lancaster (2005−2006) architecture. It features 1 cores and 1 threads. Max frequency: 1.6 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 1 MB. Built on 90 nm process technology. Socket: 754. Thermal design power (TDP): 1 MB. Passmark benchmark score: 475 points. Launch price was $69.
Processing Power
The Turion 64 ML-30 is built on the Lancaster (2005−2006) architecture. In PassMark, the Celeron 900 scores 485 against the Turion 64 ML-30's 475 — a 2.1% lead for the Celeron 900. L3 cache: 1 MB L2 Cache on the Celeron 900 vs 0 kB on the Turion 64 ML-30.
| Feature | Celeron 900 | Turion 64 ML-30 |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | — | 1 / 1 |
| Boost Clock | — | 1.6 GHz |
| Base Clock | 2.2 GHz | — |
| L3 Cache | 1 MB L2 Cache | 0 kB |
| L2 Cache | — | 1 MB |
| Process | 45 nm-50% | 90 nm |
| Architecture | — | Lancaster (2005−2006) |
| PassMark | 485+2% | 475 |
| Geekbench 6 Single | 220 | — |
| Geekbench 6 Multi | 229 | — |
Memory & Platform
The Celeron 900 uses the PGA478 socket (PCIe 2.0), while the Turion 64 ML-30 uses 754 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.
| Feature | Celeron 900 | Turion 64 ML-30 |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | PGA478 | 754 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 2.0 | PCIe 2.0 |
| Max RAM Speed | DDR3-1333 | — |
| Max RAM Capacity | 4 GB | — |
| RAM Channels | 1 | — |
| ECC Support | No | — |
| PCIe Lanes | 0 | — |
Advanced Features
Virtualization: No (Celeron 900) / not specified (Turion 64 ML-30). Primary use case: Celeron 900 targets Budget. Direct competitor: Celeron 900 rivals Pentium 4 2.80.
| Feature | Celeron 900 | Turion 64 ML-30 |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | No | — |
| Unlocked | No | — |
| AVX-512 | No | — |
| Virtualization | No | — |
| Target Use | Budget | — |
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 Turion 64 ML-30
