Celeron Dual-Core T3300 vs Athlon II X2 260u
Celeron Dual-Core T3300
Athlon II X2 260u
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 T3300 is positioned at rank 1038 and the Athlon II X2 260u is on rank 873, so the Athlon II X2 260u 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 T3300
Performance Per Dollar Athlon II X2 260u
Performance Comparison
About PassMark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
| Insight | Celeron Dual-Core T3300 | Athlon II X2 260u |
|---|---|---|
| Gaming | ✅ Superior gaming performance | ❌ Lower gaming performance |
| Workstation | ✅ Better multi-core power | ❌ Weaker in multi-core tasks |
| Price | ⚠️ Higher cost ($30) | ✅ More affordable ($10) |
| Longevity | 🛑 Legacy (Penryn (2008−2011) / 45 nm) | 🛑 Legacy (Regor (2009−2013) / 45 nm) |
💎 Value Proposition
| Insight | Celeron Dual-Core T3300 | Athlon II X2 260u |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ❌ Lower cost efficiency | ✅ Better overall value (+196%) |
| Upfront Cost | ⚠️ Higher cost ($30) | ✅ More affordable ($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 Dual-Core T3300 and Athlon II X2 260u
Celeron Dual-Core T3300
The Celeron Dual-Core T3300 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 2007-01-01. It is based on the Penryn (2008−2011) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Max frequency: 2 GHz. L2 cache: 1 MB. Built on 45 nm process technology. Socket: P. Thermal design power (TDP): 1 MB. Passmark benchmark score: 1,005 points. Launch price was $69.
Athlon II X2 260u
The Athlon II X2 260u is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 20 October 2009 (16 years ago). It is based on the Regor (2009−2013) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Max frequency: 1.8 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 1 MB. Built on 45 nm process technology. Socket: AM3. Thermal design power (TDP): 25 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 990 points. Launch price was $83.
Processing Power
Both the Celeron Dual-Core T3300 and Athlon II X2 260u share an identical 2-core/2-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 2 GHz on the Celeron Dual-Core T3300 versus 1.8 GHz on the Athlon II X2 260u — a 10.5% clock advantage for the Celeron Dual-Core T3300. The Celeron Dual-Core T3300 uses the Penryn (2008−2011) architecture (45 nm), while the Athlon II X2 260u uses Regor (2009−2013) (45 nm). In PassMark, the Celeron Dual-Core T3300 scores 1,005 against the Athlon II X2 260u's 990 — a 1.5% lead for the Celeron Dual-Core T3300.
| Feature | Celeron Dual-Core T3300 | Athlon II X2 260u |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 2 / 2 | 2 / 2 |
| Boost Clock | 2 GHz+11% | 1.8 GHz |
| L3 Cache | — | 0 kB |
| L2 Cache | 1 MB | 1 MB |
| Process | 45 nm | 45 nm |
| Architecture | Penryn (2008−2011) | Regor (2009−2013) |
| PassMark | 1,005+2% | 990 |
| Geekbench 6 Single | 300 | — |
| Geekbench 6 Multi | 520 | — |
Memory & Platform
The Celeron Dual-Core T3300 uses the P socket (PCIe 1.1), while the Athlon II X2 260u uses AM3 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR3-800 on the Celeron Dual-Core T3300 versus 1333 on the Athlon II X2 260u — the Athlon II X2 260u supports 199.1% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The Athlon II X2 260u supports up to 16 of RAM compared to 8 GB — 66.7% more capacity for professional workloads. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. Both provide 0 PCIe lanes. Chipset compatibility: GL40,GM45,GS45 (Celeron Dual-Core T3300) and AM2+,AM3 (Athlon II X2 260u).
| Feature | Celeron Dual-Core T3300 | Athlon II X2 260u |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | P | AM3 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 1.1 | PCIe 2.0+82% |
| Max RAM Speed | DDR3-800 | 1333+44333% |
| Max RAM Capacity | 8 GB+52428700% | 16 |
| RAM Channels | 2 | 2 |
| ECC Support | ❌ | ❌ |
| PCIe Lanes | 0 | 0 |
Advanced Features
Neither processor supports overclocking. Virtualization support: No (Celeron Dual-Core T3300) vs true (Athlon II X2 260u). Primary use case: Celeron Dual-Core T3300 targets Budget. Direct competitor: Celeron Dual-Core T3300 rivals Pentium T4200; Athlon II X2 260u rivals Core 2 Duo SU9400.
| Feature | Celeron Dual-Core T3300 | Athlon II X2 260u |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | No | No |
| IGPU Model | — | None |
| Unlocked | No | No |
| AVX-512 | No | No |
| Virtualization | No | true |
| Target Use | Budget | — |
Value Analysis
The Celeron Dual-Core T3300 launched at $86 MSRP, while the Athlon II X2 260u debuted at $60. At current prices ($30 vs $10), the Athlon II X2 260u is $20 cheaper. In terms of value (PassMark points per dollar), the Celeron Dual-Core T3300 delivers 33.5 pts/$ vs 99.0 pts/$ for the Athlon II X2 260u — making the Athlon II X2 260u the 98.9% better value option.
| Feature | Celeron Dual-Core T3300 | Athlon II X2 260u |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $86 | $60-30% |
| Avg Price (30d) | $30 | $10-67% |
| Performance per Dollar | 33.5 | 99.0+196% |
| Release Date | 2010 | 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 T3300 and Athlon II X2 260u
