CPU
GPU
Celeron Dual-Core T3000
Athlon II X4 600e
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 Dual-Core T3000 is positioned at rank 824 and the Athlon II X4 600e is on rank 842, so the Celeron Dual-Core T3000 offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar Celeron Dual-Core T3000
Performance Per Dollar Athlon II X4 600e
Performance Comparison
About PassMark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
| Insight | Celeron Dual-Core T3000 | Athlon II X4 600e |
|---|---|---|
| Gaming | ❌ Lower gaming performance | ✅ Superior gaming performance |
| Workstation | ✅ Better multi-core power | ❌ Weaker in multi-core tasks |
| Price | ✅ More affordable ($15) | ⚠️ Higher cost ($20) |
| Longevity | 🛑 Legacy (Penryn-1M (2009) / 45 nm) | 🛑 Legacy (Propus (2009−2011) / 45 nm) |
💎 Value Proposition
| Insight | Celeron Dual-Core T3000 | Athlon II X4 600e |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ✅ Better overall value (+33%) | ❌ Lower cost efficiency |
| Upfront Cost | ✅ More affordable ($15) | ⚠️ Higher cost ($20) |
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 Dual-Core T3000 and Athlon II X4 600e
Celeron Dual-Core T3000
The Celeron Dual-Core T3000 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 2007-01-01. It is based on the Penryn-1M (2009) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Max frequency: 1.8 GHz. L2 cache: 1 MB. Built on 45 nm process technology. Socket: P. Thermal design power (TDP): 1 MB. Passmark benchmark score: 1,797 points. Launch price was $69.
Athlon II X4 600e
The Athlon II X4 600e is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 20 October 2009 (16 years ago). It is based on the Propus (2009−2011) architecture. It features 4 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 2.2 GHz, with boost up to 2.2 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 512 kB (per core). Built on 45 nm process technology. Socket: AM3. Thermal design power (TDP): 45 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 1,795 points. Launch price was $130.
Processing Power
The Celeron Dual-Core T3000 packs 2 cores / 2 threads, while the Athlon II X4 600e offers 4 cores / 4 threads — the Athlon II X4 600e has 2 more cores. Boost clocks reach 1.8 GHz on the Celeron Dual-Core T3000 versus 2.2 GHz on the Athlon II X4 600e — a 20% clock advantage for the Athlon II X4 600e. The Celeron Dual-Core T3000 uses the Penryn-1M (2009) architecture (45 nm), while the Athlon II X4 600e uses Propus (2009−2011) (45 nm). In PassMark, the Celeron Dual-Core T3000 scores 1,797 against the Athlon II X4 600e's 1,795 — a 0.1% lead for the Celeron Dual-Core T3000.
| Feature | Celeron Dual-Core T3000 | Athlon II X4 600e |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 2 / 2 | 4 / 4+100% |
| Boost Clock | 1.8 GHz | 2.2 GHz+22% |
| Base Clock | — | 2.2 GHz |
| L3 Cache | — | 0 kB |
| L2 Cache | 1 MB+100% | 512 kB (per core) |
| Process | 45 nm | 45 nm |
| Architecture | Penryn-1M (2009) | Propus (2009−2011) |
| PassMark | 1,797 | 1,795 |
Memory & Platform
The Celeron Dual-Core T3000 uses the P socket (PCIe 1.1), while the Athlon II X4 600e uses AM3 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Both support up to DDR3-800 memory speed. The Athlon II X4 600e supports up to 16 GB of RAM compared to 8 GB — 66.7% more capacity for professional workloads. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. Both provide 16 PCIe lanes. Chipset compatibility: Mobile Intel 4 Series (Celeron Dual-Core T3000) and Socket AM3 (Athlon II X4 600e).
| Feature | Celeron Dual-Core T3000 | Athlon II X4 600e |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | P | AM3 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 1.1 | PCIe 2.0+82% |
| Max RAM Speed | DDR3-800 | DDR3-1333 |
| Max RAM Capacity | 8 GB | 16 GB+100% |
| RAM Channels | 2 | 2 |
| ECC Support | ❌ | ❌ |
| PCIe Lanes | 16 | 16 |
Advanced Features
Neither processor supports overclocking. Virtualization support: false (Celeron Dual-Core T3000) vs AMD-V (Athlon II X4 600e).
| Feature | Celeron Dual-Core T3000 | Athlon II X4 600e |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | No | No |
| Unlocked | No | No |
| AVX-512 | No | No |
| Virtualization | false | AMD-V |
Value Analysis
The Celeron Dual-Core T3000 launched at $80 MSRP, while the Athlon II X4 600e debuted at $100. At current prices ($15 vs $20), the Celeron Dual-Core T3000 is $5 cheaper. In terms of value (PassMark points per dollar), the Celeron Dual-Core T3000 delivers 119.8 pts/$ vs 89.8 pts/$ for the Athlon II X4 600e — making the Celeron Dual-Core T3000 the 28.7% better value option.
| Feature | Celeron Dual-Core T3000 | Athlon II X4 600e |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $80-20% | $100 |
| Avg Price (30d) | $15-25% | $20 |
| Performance per Dollar | 119.8+33% | 89.8 |
| Release Date | 2009 | 2009 |
Top Performing CPUs
The most powerful cpus ranked by PassMark CPU Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar CPU comparisons based on Celeron Dual-Core T3000 and Athlon II X4 600e
