CPU
GPU
Celeron E3200
Athlon 64 X2 3800+
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 E3200 is positioned at rank 683 and the Athlon 64 X2 3800+ is on rank 1094, so the Celeron E3200 offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar Celeron E3200
Performance Per Dollar Athlon 64 X2 3800+
Performance Comparison
About PassMark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
| Insight | Celeron E3200 | Athlon 64 X2 3800+ |
|---|---|---|
| Gaming | ✅ Superior gaming performance | ❌ Lower gaming performance |
| Workstation | ❌ Weaker in multi-core tasks | ✅ Better multi-core power |
| Price | ✅ More affordable ($5) | ⚠️ Higher cost ($20) |
| Longevity | 🛑 Legacy (Wolfdale (2008−2010) / 45 nm) | 🛑 Legacy (Manchester (2005−2006) / 90 nm) |
💎 Value Proposition
| Insight | Celeron E3200 | Athlon 64 X2 3800+ |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ✅ Better overall value (+298%) | ❌ Lower cost efficiency |
| Upfront Cost | ✅ More affordable ($5) | ⚠️ 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 E3200 and Athlon 64 X2 3800+
Celeron E3200
The Celeron E3200 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 30 August 2009 (16 years ago). It is based on the Wolfdale (2008−2010) 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: 1 MB (total). Built on 45 nm process technology. Socket: LGA775. Thermal design power (TDP): 65 Watt. Memory support: DDR1, DDR2, DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 1,090 points. Launch price was $52.
Athlon 64 X2 3800+
The Athlon 64 X2 3800+ is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 2009-01-01. It is based on the Manchester (2005−2006) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Max frequency: 2 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 512 kB. Built on 90 nm process technology. Socket: 939. Thermal design power (TDP): 89 Watt. Passmark benchmark score: 1,095 points. Launch price was $149.
Processing Power
Both the Celeron E3200 and Athlon 64 X2 3800+ share an identical 2-core/2-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 2.4 GHz on the Celeron E3200 versus 2 GHz on the Athlon 64 X2 3800+ — a 18.2% clock advantage for the Celeron E3200. The Celeron E3200 uses the Wolfdale (2008−2010) architecture (45 nm), while the Athlon 64 X2 3800+ uses Manchester (2005−2006) (90 nm). In PassMark, the Celeron E3200 scores 1,090 against the Athlon 64 X2 3800+'s 1,095 — a 0.5% lead for the Athlon 64 X2 3800+. Both processors carry 0 kB of L3 cache.
| Feature | Celeron E3200 | Athlon 64 X2 3800+ |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 2 / 2 | 2 / 2 |
| Boost Clock | 2.4 GHz+20% | 2 GHz |
| Base Clock | 2.4 GHz | — |
| L3 Cache | 0 kB | 0 kB |
| L2 Cache | 1 MB (total)+100% | 512 kB |
| Process | 45 nm-50% | 90 nm |
| Architecture | Wolfdale (2008−2010) | Manchester (2005−2006) |
| PassMark | 1,090 | 1,095 |
| Geekbench 6 Single | 340 | — |
| Geekbench 6 Multi | 610 | — |
Memory & Platform
The Celeron E3200 uses the LGA775 socket (PCIe 1.1), while the Athlon 64 X2 3800+ uses 939 (PCIe 1.1) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Both support up to DDR2-800 memory speed. Both support up to 16 GB of RAM. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. Both provide 0 PCIe lanes. Chipset compatibility: G31,G41,P45 (Celeron E3200) and AMD AM2 (Athlon 64 X2 3800+).
| Feature | Celeron E3200 | Athlon 64 X2 3800+ |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | LGA775 | 939 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 1.1 | PCIe 1.1 |
| Max RAM Speed | DDR2-800 | DDR2-800 |
| Max RAM Capacity | 16 GB | 16 GB |
| RAM Channels | 2 | 2 |
| ECC Support | ❌ | ❌ |
| PCIe Lanes | 0 | 0 |
Advanced Features
Virtualization: VT-x (Celeron E3200) / not specified (Athlon 64 X2 3800+). Primary use case: Celeron E3200 targets Budget. Direct competitor: Celeron E3200 rivals Pentium E5200.
| Feature | Celeron E3200 | Athlon 64 X2 3800+ |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | No | No |
| Unlocked | No | — |
| AVX-512 | No | — |
| Virtualization | VT-x | — |
| Target Use | Budget | — |
Value Analysis
The Celeron E3200 launched at $43 MSRP, while the Athlon 64 X2 3800+ debuted at $354. At current prices ($5 vs $20), the Celeron E3200 is $15 cheaper. In terms of value (PassMark points per dollar), the Celeron E3200 delivers 218.0 pts/$ vs 54.8 pts/$ for the Athlon 64 X2 3800+ — making the Celeron E3200 the 119.7% better value option.
| Feature | Celeron E3200 | Athlon 64 X2 3800+ |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $43-88% | $354 |
| Avg Price (30d) | $5-75% | $20 |
| Performance per Dollar | 218.0+298% | 54.8 |
| Release Date | 2009 | 2005 |
Top Performing CPUs
The most powerful cpus ranked by PassMark CPU Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar CPU comparisons based on Celeron E3200 and Athlon 64 X2 3800+
