Celeron M P4500 vs Phenom II X4 965 BE (125W)

Celeron M P4500 vs Phenom II X4 965 BE (125W) Performance Spectrum

Celeron M P4500

2 / 2

2,533

0.0%

Phenom II X4 965 BE (125W)

4 / 4

2,544

+0.4%

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7955WX

Ryzen Threadripper 3990X

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 M P4500 vs Phenom II X4 965 BE (125W) 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.

Celeron M P4500 vs Phenom II X4 965 BE (125W): Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

See where each CPU makes more sense in practice: gaming, heavier work, platform cost, power draw, and upgrade path.

Celeron M P4500

2010

Why buy it

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Phenom II X4 965 BE (125W) across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (2,533 vs 2,544).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (2 MB vs 6 MB).
❌309.6% higher power demand at 512W vs 125W.

Phenom II X4 965 BE (125W)

2009

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +3.5% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅+200% larger total L3 cache (6 MB vs 2 MB).
✅Draws 125W instead of 512W, a 387W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Fewer obvious downsides in this matchup outside of normal market pricing swings.

Quick Answers

So, is Phenom II X4 965 BE (125W) better than Celeron M P4500?

Yes. Phenom II X4 965 BE (125W) is the better all-around CPU here. It gives you a 3.5% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data and 0.4% better PassMark, which is enough to make it the stronger overall pick.

Which one is better for gaming?

If gaming is the priority, Phenom II X4 965 BE (125W) is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 3.5% more average FPS across 50 shared CPU game tests.

Which one is better for streaming, content creation, and heavy multitasking?

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Phenom II X4 965 BE (125W) is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.4% better PassMark, backed by 4 cores and 4 threads. It also has the larger cache pool with 200% larger total L3 cache (6 MB vs 2 MB).

Which one is the smarter buy today, not just the cheaper CPU?

Phenom II X4 965 BE (125W) still makes the most sense overall. Phenom II X4 965 BE (125W) comes in at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it still gives you a 3.5% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data.

Which one is more future-proof for 2026 and beyond?

Celeron M P4500 makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2010 vs 2009). That makes it the safer long-term bet.

Celeron M P4500 vs Phenom II X4 965 BE (125W) Technical Specifications

Side-by-side specs, architecture details, clocks, memory, power, and platform differences.

Celeron M P4500

The Celeron M P4500 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 1 April 2010 (15 years ago). It is based on the Arrandale (2010−2011) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Max frequency: 1.86 GHz. L3 cache: 2 MB. L2 cache: 512 kB. Built on 32 nm process technology. Socket: PGA988. Thermal design power (TDP): 512 kB + 2 MB. Passmark benchmark score: 2,533 points. Launch price was $86.

Phenom II X4 965 BE (125W)

The Phenom II X4 965 BE (125W) is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 2009-01-01. It is based on the Deneb (2009−2011) architecture. It features 4 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 3.4 GHz, with boost up to 3.4 GHz. L3 cache: 6 MB (total). L2 cache: 512 kB (per core). Built on 45 nm process technology. Socket: AM3. Thermal design power (TDP): 125 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 2,544 points. Launch price was $149.

⚡

Processing Power

The Celeron M P4500 packs 2 cores / 2 threads, while the Phenom II X4 965 BE (125W) offers 4 cores / 4 threads — the Phenom II X4 965 BE (125W) has 2 more cores. Boost clocks reach 1.86 GHz on the Celeron M P4500 versus 3.4 GHz on the Phenom II X4 965 BE (125W) — a 58.6% clock advantage for the Phenom II X4 965 BE (125W). The Celeron M P4500 uses the Arrandale (2010−2011) architecture (32 nm), while the Phenom II X4 965 BE (125W) uses Deneb (2009−2011) (45 nm). In PassMark, the Celeron M P4500 scores 2,533 against the Phenom II X4 965 BE (125W)'s 2,544 — a 0.4% lead for the Phenom II X4 965 BE (125W). L3 cache: 2 MB on the Celeron M P4500 vs 6 MB (total) on the Phenom II X4 965 BE (125W).

Feature	Celeron M P4500	Phenom II X4 965 BE (125W)
Cores / Threads	2 / 2	4 / 4+100%
Boost Clock	1.86 GHz	3.4 GHz+83%
Base Clock	—	3.4 GHz
L3 Cache	2 MB	6 MB (total)+200%
L2 Cache	512 kB	512 kB (per core)
Process	32 nm-29%	45 nm
Architecture	Arrandale (2010−2011)	Deneb (2009−2011)
PassMark	2,533	2,544

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Celeron M P4500 uses the PGA988 socket (PCIe 2.0), while the Phenom II X4 965 BE (125W) uses AM3 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.