Celeron N3050
VS
Athlon 64 X2 3800+

Celeron N3050 vs Athlon 64 X2 3800+

Intel

Celeron N3050

2 Cores2 Thrd6 WWMax: 2.16 GHz2015
VS
AMD

Athlon 64 X2 3800+

2 Cores2 Thrd89 WWMax: 2 GHz2005

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 N3050 is positioned at rank 744 and the Athlon 64 X2 3800+ is on rank 1094, so the Celeron N3050 offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.

MSRP is the manufacturer's suggested retail price.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.

Performance Per Dollar Celeron N3050

#731
Atom x5-Z8300
MSRP: $20|Avg: N/A
1068%
#732
Atom Z3735G
MSRP: $17|Avg: N/A
1052%
#733
Core i5-480M
MSRP: $81|Avg: $77
966%
#734
Core i5-460M
MSRP: $80|Avg: $129
961%
#735
Core i5-2540M
MSRP: $266|Avg: $10
953%
#737
Core i5-450M
MSRP: $32|Avg: $31
920%
#738
Core i3-380M
MSRP: $49|Avg: $25
882%
#739
Core i5-430M
MSRP: N/A|Avg: $33
881%
#740
Core 2 Duo T6600
MSRP: N/A|Avg: $4
857%
#743
Pentium 6805
MSRP: $161|Avg: $161
100%
#744
Celeron N3050
MSRP: N/A|Avg: N/A
100%
#748
Ryzen 3 7320C
MSRP: $299|Avg: $200
100%
#756
Core i7-11370H
MSRP: $426|Avg: N/A
99%
Based on actual market prices and performance synthetic scores.

Performance Per Dollar Athlon 64 X2 3800+

#1
Ryzen 9 7950X
MSRP: $194|Avg: $20
100879%
#2
Core i9-10900T
MSRP: $120|Avg: $5
95320%
#3
Ryzen 3 PRO 4355GE
MSRP: $423|Avg: $5
69210%
#4
Ryzen Threadripper 3960X
MSRP: $1399|Avg: $85
20850%
#5
Ryzen 9 9950X
MSRP: $649|Avg: $129
16516%
#6
Ryzen 5 8400F
MSRP: $303|Avg: $55
14448%
#7
Ryzen 7 PRO 2700
MSRP: $299|Avg: $60
8275%
#8
Ryzen 5 2600X
MSRP: $229|Avg: $55
8167%
#9
Ryzen 3 PRO 5350G
MSRP: $150|Avg: $60
7436%
#10
Core Ultra 5 245KF
MSRP: $294|Avg: $189
7436%
#11
Ryzen 5 5500
MSRP: $159|Avg: $85
7352%
#12
Ryzen 5 3600
MSRP: $199|Avg: $80
7154%
#13
Core i3-9100E
MSRP: $202|Avg: $30
7054%
#14
Core Ultra 5 245K
MSRP: $319|Avg: $200
7026%
#15
Core i3-8300T
MSRP: $138|Avg: $25
6962%
#1094
Athlon 64 X2 3800+
MSRP: $354|Avg: $20
100%
#1095
Athlon 64 3000+
MSRP: $149|Avg: $10
98%
#1096
Athlon XP 3100+
MSRP: $150|Avg: $20
92%
#1097
Athlon 64 3300+
MSRP: $200|Avg: $200
84%
#1098
Athlon 64 2800+
MSRP: $178|Avg: $15
76%
#1099
Athlon 64 3700+
MSRP: $272|Avg: $20
74%
#1100
Athlon 64 FX-72
MSRP: $799|Avg: $40
73%
#1101
Athlon 64 X2 4200+
MSRP: $581|Avg: $110
70%
#1102
Athlon 64 3500+
MSRP: $272|Avg: $10
68%
#1103
Pentium D 830
MSRP: $316|Avg: $20
63%
#1104
Pentium D 960
MSRP: $523|Avg: $15
62%
#1105
Athlon XP 2500+
MSRP: $172|Avg: $15
60%
#1106
Athlon 64 3800+
MSRP: $354|Avg: $10
59%
#1107
Pentium 4 2.53
MSRP: $193|Avg: $13
58%
#1108
Pentium 4 2.40
MSRP: $193|Avg: $193
54%
#1109
Athlon XP 2400+
MSRP: $193|Avg: $10
51%
Based on actual market prices and performance synthetic scores.

Performance Comparison

About PassMark

🏆 Chipversus Verdict

🚀 Performance Leadership

Generational Difference: This comparison involves processors from different technological eras. The Celeron N3050 (2015) utilizes 14 nm technology and DDR3, providing a fundamental performance advantage.
InsightCeleron N3050Athlon 64 X2 3800+
Gaming
Superior gaming performance
Lower gaming performance
Workstation
Better multi-core power
Weaker in multi-core tasks
Price
More affordable ($0)
⚠️ Higher cost ($20)
Longevity
🛑 Legacy (Braswell (2015−2016) / 14 nm)
🛑 Legacy (Manchester (2005−2006) / 90 nm)

💎 Value Proposition

The Athlon 64 X2 3800+ (2005) relies on 90 nm technology and older memory, placing it in a different performance category relative to modern standards.
InsightCeleron N3050Athlon 64 X2 3800+
Cost Efficiency
Lower cost efficiency
Lower cost efficiency
Upfront Cost
More affordable ($0)
⚠️ Higher cost ($20)

Performance Check

Paired with RTX 4090

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 N3050 and Athlon 64 X2 3800+

Intel

Celeron N3050

The Celeron N3050 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 1 April 2015 (10 years ago). It is based on the Braswell (2015−2016) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 1.6 GHz, with boost up to 2.16 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 1 MB. Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: FCBGA1170. Thermal design power (TDP): 6 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 1,099 points. Launch price was $107.

AMD

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 N3050 and Athlon 64 X2 3800+ share an identical 2-core/2-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 2.16 GHz on the Celeron N3050 versus 2 GHz on the Athlon 64 X2 3800+ — a 7.7% clock advantage for the Celeron N3050. The Celeron N3050 uses the Braswell (2015−2016) architecture (14 nm), while the Athlon 64 X2 3800+ uses Manchester (2005−2006) (90 nm). In PassMark, the Celeron N3050 scores 1,099 against the Athlon 64 X2 3800+'s 1,095 — a 0.4% lead for the Celeron N3050. Both processors carry 0 kB of L3 cache.

FeatureCeleron N3050Athlon 64 X2 3800+
Cores / Threads
2 / 2
2 / 2
Boost Clock
2.16 GHz+8%
2 GHz
Base Clock
1.6 GHz
L3 Cache
0 kB
0 kB
L2 Cache
1 MB+100%
512 kB
Process
14 nm-84%
90 nm
Architecture
Braswell (2015−2016)
Manchester (2005−2006)
PassMark
1,099
1,095
Geekbench 6 Single
221
Geekbench 6 Multi
440
🧠

Memory & Platform

The Celeron N3050 uses the FCBGA1170 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Athlon 64 X2 3800+ uses 939 (PCIe 1.1) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR3L-1600 on the Celeron N3050 versus DDR2-800 on the Athlon 64 X2 3800+ — the Celeron N3050 supports 40% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The Athlon 64 X2 3800+ 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 N3050) vs 0 (Athlon 64 X2 3800+) — the Celeron N3050 offers 4 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: Braswell SoC (Celeron N3050) and AMD AM2 (Athlon 64 X2 3800+).

FeatureCeleron N3050Athlon 64 X2 3800+
Socket
FCBGA1170
939
PCIe Generation
PCIe 3.0+173%
PCIe 1.1
Max RAM Speed
DDR3L-1600+50%
DDR2-800
Max RAM Capacity
8 GB
16 GB+100%
RAM Channels
2
2
ECC Support
PCIe Lanes
4
0
🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization: VT-x / EPT (Celeron N3050) / not specified (Athlon 64 X2 3800+). The Celeron N3050 includes integrated graphics (Intel HD Graphics (Braswell)), while the Athlon 64 X2 3800+ requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Celeron N3050 targets Netbook. Direct competitor: Celeron N3050 rivals AMD E2-7110.

FeatureCeleron N3050Athlon 64 X2 3800+
Integrated GPU
Yes
No
IGPU Model
Intel HD Graphics (Braswell)
Unlocked
No
AVX-512
No
Virtualization
VT-x / EPT
Target Use
Netbook