Celeron N2808 vs Mobile Athlon 64 3700+

Celeron N2808 vs Mobile Athlon 64 3700+ Performance Spectrum

Celeron N2808

2 / 2

615

0.0%

Mobile Athlon 64 3700+

1 / 1

622

+1.1%

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3955WX

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 N2808 vs Mobile Athlon 64 3700+ 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 N2808 vs Mobile Athlon 64 3700+: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

Celeron N2808

2014

Why buy it

✅100+% more PCIe lanes (4 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with HD Graphics (Bay Trail), while Mobile Athlon 64 3700+ needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Mobile Athlon 64 3700+ across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (615 vs 622).
❌300% higher power demand at 4W vs 1W.

Mobile Athlon 64 3700+

2005

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +6.9% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Draws 1W instead of 4W, a 3W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌No integrated graphics, while Celeron N2808 can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Quick Answers

So, is Mobile Athlon 64 3700+ better than Celeron N2808?

Yes. Mobile Athlon 64 3700+ is the better all-around CPU here. It gives you a 6.9% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data and 1.1% better PassMark, which is enough to make it the stronger overall pick.

Which one is better for gaming?

If gaming is the priority, Mobile Athlon 64 3700+ is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 6.9% 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, Mobile Athlon 64 3700+ is the stronger fit. You are getting 1.1% better PassMark, backed by 1 cores and 1 threads.

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

Mobile Athlon 64 3700+ still makes the most sense overall. Mobile Athlon 64 3700+ comes in at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it still gives you a 6.9% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data.

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

Celeron N2808 makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2014 vs 2005). That makes it the safer long-term bet.

Celeron N2808 vs Mobile Athlon 64 3700+ Technical Specifications

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

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.

Mobile Athlon 64 3700+

The Mobile Athlon 64 3700+ is manufactured by AMD. It was released in Agosto 2005 (20 years ago). It is based on the Clawhammer (2001−2005) architecture. It features 1 cores and 1 threads. Max frequency: 2.4 GHz. L2 cache: 1 MB. Socket: 754. Thermal design power (TDP): 1 MB. Memory support: DDR1. Passmark benchmark score: 622 points. Launch price was $69.

⚡

Processing Power

The Celeron N2808 packs 2 cores / 2 threads, while the Mobile 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 Mobile Athlon 64 3700+ — a 6.5% clock advantage for the Mobile Athlon 64 3700+. The Celeron N2808 uses the Bay Trail-M (2013−2014) architecture (22 nm), while the Mobile Athlon 64 3700+ uses Clawhammer (2001−2005). In PassMark, the Celeron N2808 scores 615 against the Mobile Athlon 64 3700+'s 622 — a 1.1% lead for the Mobile Athlon 64 3700+.

Feature	Celeron N2808	Mobile 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	—
L2 Cache	512K (per core)+51100%	1 MB
Process	22 nm	—
Architecture	Bay Trail-M (2013−2014)	Clawhammer (2001−2005)
PassMark	615	622+1%

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Celeron N2808 uses the FCBGA1170 socket (PCIe 2.0), while the Mobile Athlon 64 3700+ uses 754 (PCIe 1.1) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR3L-1333 on the Celeron N2808 versus 400 on the Mobile Athlon 64 3700+ — the Celeron N2808 supports 233.3% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The Celeron N2808 supports up to 4 GB of RAM compared to 2 GB — 100% more capacity for professional workloads. Both feature 1-channel memory with ECC support. PCIe lanes: 4 (Celeron N2808) vs 0 (Mobile Athlon 64 3700+) — the Celeron N2808 offers 4 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives.

Feature	Celeron N2808	Mobile Athlon 64 3700+
Socket	FCBGA1170	754
PCIe Generation	PCIe 2.0+82%	PCIe 1.1
Max RAM Speed	DDR3L-1333+233%	400
Max RAM Capacity	4 GB+100%	2 GB
RAM Channels	1	1
ECC Support	No	No
PCIe Lanes	4	0

🔧

Advanced Features

Neither processor supports overclocking. Virtualization support: VT-x (Celeron N2808) vs false (Mobile Athlon 64 3700+). The Celeron N2808 includes integrated graphics (HD Graphics (Bay Trail)), while the Mobile Athlon 64 3700+ requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Celeron N2808 targets Mobile. Direct competitor: Mobile Athlon 64 3700+ rivals Pentium M 735.