CPU
GPU
Celeron N2820
Athlon II X2 240
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 N2820 is positioned at rank 259 and the Athlon II X2 240 is on rank 852, so the Celeron N2820 offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar Celeron N2820
Performance Per Dollar Athlon II X2 240
Performance Comparison
About PassMark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
| Insight | Celeron N2820 | Athlon II X2 240 |
|---|---|---|
| Gaming | ❌ Lower gaming performance | ✅ Superior gaming performance |
| Workstation | ✅ Better multi-core power | ❌ Weaker in multi-core tasks |
| Price | ✅ More affordable ($0) | ⚠️ Higher cost ($10) |
| Longevity | 🛑 Legacy (Bay Trail-M (2013−2014) / 22 nm) | 🛑 Legacy (Regor (2009−2013) / 45 nm) |
💎 Value Proposition
| Insight | Celeron N2820 | Athlon II X2 240 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ❌ Lower cost efficiency | ❌ Lower cost efficiency |
| Upfront Cost | ✅ More affordable ($0) | ⚠️ Higher cost ($10) |
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 N2820 and Athlon II X2 240
Celeron N2820
The Celeron N2820 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 1 December 2013 (12 years ago). It is based on the Bay Trail-M (2013−2014) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 2.13 GHz, with boost up to 2.39 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 512K (per core). Built on 22 nm process technology. Socket: FCBGA1170. Thermal design power (TDP): 7.5 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 1,061 points. Launch price was $107.
Athlon II X2 240
The Athlon II X2 240 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 23 July 2009 (16 years ago). It is based on the Regor (2009−2013) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 2.8 GHz, with boost up to 2.8 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 2 MB. Built on 45 nm process technology. Socket: AM3. Thermal design power (TDP): 65 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 1,060 points. Launch price was $35.
Processing Power
Both the Celeron N2820 and Athlon II X2 240 share an identical 2-core/2-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 2.39 GHz on the Celeron N2820 versus 2.8 GHz on the Athlon II X2 240 — a 15.8% clock advantage for the Athlon II X2 240 (base: 2.13 GHz vs 2.8 GHz). The Celeron N2820 uses the Bay Trail-M (2013−2014) architecture (22 nm), while the Athlon II X2 240 uses Regor (2009−2013) (45 nm). In PassMark, the Celeron N2820 scores 1,061 against the Athlon II X2 240's 1,060 — a 0.1% lead for the Celeron N2820. Geekbench 6 single-core — the metric most relevant to gaming — records 220 vs 373, a 51.6% lead for the Athlon II X2 240 that directly translates to higher frame rates. Multi-core Geekbench: 400 vs 700 (54.5% advantage for the Athlon II X2 240). Both processors carry 0 kB of L3 cache.
| Feature | Celeron N2820 | Athlon II X2 240 |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 2 / 2 | 2 / 2 |
| Boost Clock | 2.39 GHz | 2.8 GHz+17% |
| Base Clock | 2.13 GHz | 2.8 GHz+31% |
| L3 Cache | 0 kB | 0 kB |
| L2 Cache | 512K (per core) | 2 MB+300% |
| Process | 22 nm-51% | 45 nm |
| Architecture | Bay Trail-M (2013−2014) | Regor (2009−2013) |
| PassMark | 1,061 | 1,060 |
| Geekbench 6 Single | 220 | 373+70% |
| Geekbench 6 Multi | 400 | 700+75% |
Memory & Platform
The Celeron N2820 uses the FCBGA1170 socket (PCIe 2.0), while the Athlon II X2 240 uses AM3 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Both support up to DDR3L-1066 memory speed. The Athlon II X2 240 supports up to 16 GB of RAM compared to 8 GB — 66.7% more capacity for professional workloads. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. PCIe lanes: 4 (Celeron N2820) vs 16 (Athlon II X2 240) — the Athlon II X2 240 offers 12 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: SoC (Celeron N2820) and 760G,785G,790GX,880G,890GX (Athlon II X2 240).
| Feature | Celeron N2820 | Athlon II X2 240 |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | FCBGA1170 | AM3 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 2.0 | PCIe 2.0 |
| Max RAM Speed | DDR3L-1066 | DDR3-1066 |
| Max RAM Capacity | 8 GB | 16 GB+100% |
| RAM Channels | 2 | 2 |
| ECC Support | ❌ | ❌ |
| PCIe Lanes | 4 | 16+300% |
Advanced Features
Neither processor supports overclocking. Virtualization support: VT-x (Celeron N2820) vs AMD-V (Athlon II X2 240). The Celeron N2820 includes integrated graphics (Intel HD Graphics (Bay Trail)), while the Athlon II X2 240 requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Celeron N2820 targets Netbook, Athlon II X2 240 targets Desktop. Direct competitor: Celeron N2820 rivals AMD A6-6310; Athlon II X2 240 rivals Pentium E5400.
| Feature | Celeron N2820 | Athlon II X2 240 |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | Yes | No |
| IGPU Model | Intel HD Graphics (Bay Trail) | None |
| Unlocked | No | No |
| AVX-512 | No | No |
| Virtualization | VT-x | AMD-V |
| Target Use | Netbook | Desktop |
Top Performing CPUs
The most powerful cpus ranked by PassMark CPU Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar CPU comparisons based on Celeron N2820 and Athlon II X2 240
