Celeron E1600 vs Athlon 64 X2 TK-42
Celeron E1600
Athlon 64 X2 TK-42
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 E1600 is positioned at rank 896 and the Athlon 64 X2 TK-42 is on rank 1019, so the Celeron E1600 offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar Celeron E1600
Performance Per Dollar Athlon 64 X2 TK-42
Performance Comparison
About PassMark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
| Insight | Celeron E1600 | Athlon 64 X2 TK-42 |
|---|---|---|
| Gaming | ✅ Superior gaming performance | ❌ Lower gaming performance |
| Workstation | ✅ Better multi-core power | ❌ Weaker in multi-core tasks |
| Price | Equivalent pricing | Equivalent pricing |
| Longevity | 🛑 Legacy (Allendale (2006−2009) / 65 nm) | 🛑 Legacy (Tyler (2007−2009) / 65 nm) |
💎 Value Proposition
| Insight | Celeron E1600 | Athlon 64 X2 TK-42 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ✅ Better overall value (+5%) | ❌ Lower cost efficiency |
| Upfront Cost | Equivalent pricing | Equivalent pricing |
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 E1600 and Athlon 64 X2 TK-42
Celeron E1600
The Celeron E1600 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 2007-01-01. It is based on the Allendale (2006−2009) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 2.4 GHz, with boost up to 2.4 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 512 kB (total). Built on 65 nm process technology. Socket: LGA775. Thermal design power (TDP): 65 Watt. Memory support: DDR1, DDR2, DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 815 points. Launch price was $69.
Athlon 64 X2 TK-42
The Athlon 64 X2 TK-42 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 2009-01-01. It is based on the Tyler (2007−2009) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Max frequency: 1.6 GHz. L2 cache: 1 MB. Built on 65 nm process technology. Socket: S1. Thermal design power (TDP): 1 MB. Passmark benchmark score: 775 points. Launch price was $149.
Processing Power
Both the Celeron E1600 and Athlon 64 X2 TK-42 share an identical 2-core/2-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 2.4 GHz on the Celeron E1600 versus 1.6 GHz on the Athlon 64 X2 TK-42 — a 40% clock advantage for the Celeron E1600. The Celeron E1600 uses the Allendale (2006−2009) architecture (65 nm), while the Athlon 64 X2 TK-42 uses Tyler (2007−2009) (65 nm). In PassMark, the Celeron E1600 scores 815 against the Athlon 64 X2 TK-42's 775 — a 5% lead for the Celeron E1600.
| Feature | Celeron E1600 | Athlon 64 X2 TK-42 |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 2 / 2 | 2 / 2 |
| Boost Clock | 2.4 GHz+50% | 1.6 GHz |
| Base Clock | 2.4 GHz | — |
| L3 Cache | 0 kB | — |
| L2 Cache | 512 kB (total) | 1 MB+100% |
| Process | 65 nm | 65 nm |
| Architecture | Allendale (2006−2009) | Tyler (2007−2009) |
| PassMark | 815+5% | 775 |
| Geekbench 6 Single | 310 | — |
| Geekbench 6 Multi | 560 | — |
Memory & Platform
The Celeron E1600 uses the LGA775 socket (PCIe 1.1), while the Athlon 64 X2 TK-42 uses S1 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Both support up to DDR2-800 memory speed. Both support up to 8 GB of RAM. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. Both provide 0 PCIe lanes. Chipset compatibility: G31,P35,G41 (Celeron E1600) and AMD S1 (Athlon 64 X2 TK-42).
| Feature | Celeron E1600 | Athlon 64 X2 TK-42 |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | LGA775 | S1 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 1.1 | PCIe 2.0+82% |
| Max RAM Speed | DDR2-800 | DDR2-667 |
| Max RAM Capacity | 8 GB | 8 GB |
| RAM Channels | 2 | 2 |
| ECC Support | ❌ | ❌ |
| PCIe Lanes | 0 | 0 |
Advanced Features
Virtualization: No (Celeron E1600) / not specified (Athlon 64 X2 TK-42). Primary use case: Celeron E1600 targets Budget. Direct competitor: Celeron E1600 rivals Pentium E2220.
| Feature | Celeron E1600 | Athlon 64 X2 TK-42 |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | No | No |
| Unlocked | No | — |
| AVX-512 | No | — |
| Virtualization | No | — |
| Target Use | Budget | — |
Value Analysis
The Celeron E1600 launched at $53 MSRP, while the Athlon 64 X2 TK-42 debuted at $60. At current prices ($10 vs $10), the Athlon 64 X2 TK-42 is $0 cheaper. In terms of value (PassMark points per dollar), the Celeron E1600 delivers 81.5 pts/$ vs 77.5 pts/$ for the Athlon 64 X2 TK-42 — making the Celeron E1600 the 5% better value option.
| Feature | Celeron E1600 | Athlon 64 X2 TK-42 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $53-12% | $60 |
| Avg Price (30d) | $10 | $10 |
| Performance per Dollar | 81.5+5% | 77.5 |
| 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 E1600 and Athlon 64 X2 TK-42
