Celeron N2808 vs Athlon 64 3700+
Celeron N2808
Athlon 64 3700+
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 N2808 is positioned at rank 1192 and the Athlon 64 3700+ is on rank 1099, so the Athlon 64 3700+ offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar Celeron N2808
Performance Per Dollar Athlon 64 3700+
Performance Comparison
About PassMark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
| Insight | Celeron N2808 | Athlon 64 3700+ |
|---|---|---|
| Gaming | ❌ Lower gaming performance | ✅ Superior gaming performance |
| Workstation | ❌ Weaker in multi-core tasks | ✅ Better multi-core power |
| Price | ✅ More affordable ($0) | ⚠️ Higher cost ($20) |
| Longevity | 🛑 Legacy (Bay Trail-M (2013−2014) / 22 nm) | 🛑 Legacy (San Diego (2001−2005) / 130 nm) |
💎 Value Proposition
| Insight | Celeron N2808 | Athlon 64 3700+ |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ❌ Lower cost efficiency | ❌ Lower cost efficiency |
| Upfront Cost | ✅ More affordable ($0) | ⚠️ 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 N2808 and Athlon 64 3700+
Celeron N2808
The Celeron N2808 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 2007-01-01. It is based on the Bay Trail-M (2013−2014) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 1.58 GHz, with boost up to 2.25 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 512K (per core). Built on 22 nm process technology. Socket: FCBGA1170. Thermal design power (TDP): 4.5 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 615 points. Launch price was $69.
Athlon 64 3700+
The Athlon 64 3700+ is manufactured by AMD. It was released in Janeiro 2001 (24 years ago). It is based on the San Diego (2001−2005) architecture. It features 1 cores and 1 threads. Max frequency: 2.4 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 1 MB. Built on 130 nm process technology. Socket: 939. Thermal design power (TDP): 89 Watt. Passmark benchmark score: 622 points. Launch price was $69.
Processing Power
The Celeron N2808 packs 2 cores / 2 threads, while the Athlon 64 3700+ offers 1 cores / 1 threads — the Celeron N2808 has 1 more core. Boost clocks reach 2.25 GHz on the Celeron N2808 versus 2.4 GHz on the Athlon 64 3700+ — a 6.5% clock advantage for the Athlon 64 3700+. The Celeron N2808 uses the Bay Trail-M (2013−2014) architecture (22 nm), while the Athlon 64 3700+ uses San Diego (2001−2005) (130 nm). In PassMark, the Celeron N2808 scores 615 against the Athlon 64 3700+'s 622 — a 1.1% lead for the Athlon 64 3700+. Both processors carry 0 kB of L3 cache.
| Feature | Celeron N2808 | Athlon 64 3700+ |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 2 / 2+100% | 1 / 1 |
| Boost Clock | 2.25 GHz | 2.4 GHz+7% |
| Base Clock | 1.58 GHz | — |
| L3 Cache | 0 kB | 0 kB |
| L2 Cache | 512K (per core) | 1 MB+100% |
| Process | 22 nm-83% | 130 nm |
| Architecture | Bay Trail-M (2013−2014) | San Diego (2001−2005) |
| PassMark | 615 | 622+1% |
Memory & Platform
The Celeron N2808 uses the FCBGA1170 socket (PCIe 2.0), while the Athlon 64 3700+ uses 939 (PCIe 1.1) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR3L-1333 on the Celeron N2808 versus DDR-400 on the Athlon 64 3700+ — the Celeron N2808 supports -203% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. Both support up to 4 GB of RAM. Memory channels: 1 (Celeron N2808) vs 2 (Athlon 64 3700+). PCIe lanes: 4 (Celeron N2808) vs 0 (Athlon 64 3700+) — the Celeron N2808 offers 4 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives.
| Feature | Celeron N2808 | Athlon 64 3700+ |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | FCBGA1170 | 939 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 2.0+82% | PCIe 1.1 |
| Max RAM Speed | DDR3L-1333 | DDR-400 |
| Max RAM Capacity | 4 GB | 4 GB |
| RAM Channels | 1 | 2+100% |
| ECC Support | ❌ | ❌ |
| PCIe Lanes | 4 | 0 |
Advanced Features
Virtualization: VT-x (Celeron N2808) / not specified (Athlon 64 3700+). The Celeron N2808 includes integrated graphics (HD Graphics (Bay Trail)), while the Athlon 64 3700+ requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Celeron N2808 targets Mobile.
| Feature | Celeron N2808 | Athlon 64 3700+ |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | Yes | No |
| IGPU Model | HD Graphics (Bay Trail) | — |
| Unlocked | No | — |
| AVX-512 | No | — |
| Virtualization | VT-x | — |
| Target Use | Mobile | — |
Top Performing CPUs
The most powerful cpus ranked by PassMark CPU Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar CPU comparisons based on Celeron N2808 and Athlon 64 3700+
