CPU
GPU
Celeron N3160
Athlon II X2 250e
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 N3160 is positioned at rank 697 and the Athlon II X2 250e is on rank 889, so the Celeron N3160 offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar Celeron N3160
Performance Per Dollar Athlon II X2 250e
Performance Comparison
About PassMark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
| Insight | Celeron N3160 | Athlon II X2 250e |
|---|---|---|
| Gaming | ❌ Lower gaming performance | ✅ Superior gaming performance |
| Workstation | ❌ Weaker in multi-core tasks | ✅ Better multi-core power |
| Price | ✅ More affordable ($0) | ⚠️ Higher cost ($15) |
| Longevity | 🛑 Legacy (Braswell (2015−2016) / 14 nm) | 🛑 Legacy (Regor (2009−2013) / 45 nm) |
💎 Value Proposition
| Insight | Celeron N3160 | Athlon II X2 250e |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ❌ Lower cost efficiency | ❌ Lower cost efficiency |
| Upfront Cost | ✅ More affordable ($0) | ⚠️ Higher cost ($15) |
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 N3160 and Athlon II X2 250e
Celeron N3160
The Celeron N3160 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 15 January 2016 (9 years ago). It is based on the Braswell (2015−2016) architecture. It features 4 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 1.6 GHz, with boost up to 2.24 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 2 MB. Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: FCBGA1170. Thermal design power (TDP): 6 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 1,195 points. Launch price was $107.
Athlon II X2 250e
The Athlon II X2 250e is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 21 September 2010 (15 years ago). It is based on the Regor (2009−2013) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 3 GHz, with boost up to 3 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 1 MB. Built on 45 nm process technology. Socket: AM3. Thermal design power (TDP): 45 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 1,202 points. Launch price was $77.
Processing Power
The Celeron N3160 packs 4 cores / 4 threads, while the Athlon II X2 250e offers 2 cores / 2 threads — the Celeron N3160 has 2 more cores. Boost clocks reach 2.24 GHz on the Celeron N3160 versus 3 GHz on the Athlon II X2 250e — a 29% clock advantage for the Athlon II X2 250e (base: 1.6 GHz vs 3 GHz). The Celeron N3160 uses the Braswell (2015−2016) architecture (14 nm), while the Athlon II X2 250e uses Regor (2009−2013) (45 nm). In PassMark, the Celeron N3160 scores 1,195 against the Athlon II X2 250e's 1,202 — a 0.6% lead for the Athlon II X2 250e. Both processors carry 0 kB of L3 cache.
| Feature | Celeron N3160 | Athlon II X2 250e |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 4 / 4+100% | 2 / 2 |
| Boost Clock | 2.24 GHz | 3 GHz+34% |
| Base Clock | 1.6 GHz | 3 GHz+87% |
| L3 Cache | 0 kB | 0 kB |
| L2 Cache | 2 MB+100% | 1 MB |
| Process | 14 nm-69% | 45 nm |
| Architecture | Braswell (2015−2016) | Regor (2009−2013) |
| PassMark | 1,195 | 1,202 |
| Geekbench 6 Single | — | 250 |
| Geekbench 6 Multi | — | 470 |
Memory & Platform
The Celeron N3160 uses the FCBGA1170 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Athlon II X2 250e uses AM3 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches 1600 on the Celeron N3160 versus DDR3-1333 on the Athlon II X2 250e — the Celeron N3160 supports 199.3% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The Athlon II X2 250e supports up to 16 GB of RAM compared to 8 — 66.7% more capacity for professional workloads. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. PCIe lanes: 4 (Celeron N3160) vs 0 (Athlon II X2 250e) — the Celeron N3160 offers 4 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: FCBGA1170 (Celeron N3160) and 760G,780G,785G,790GX (Athlon II X2 250e).
| Feature | Celeron N3160 | Athlon II X2 250e |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | FCBGA1170 | AM3 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 3.0+50% | PCIe 2.0 |
| Max RAM Speed | 1600+53233% | DDR3-1333 |
| Max RAM Capacity | 8 | 16 GB+209715100% |
| RAM Channels | 2 | 2 |
| ECC Support | ❌ | ✅ |
| PCIe Lanes | 4 | 0 |
Advanced Features
Neither processor supports overclocking. Virtualization support: true (Celeron N3160) vs AMD-V (Athlon II X2 250e). The Celeron N3160 includes integrated graphics (Intel HD Graphics 400), while the Athlon II X2 250e requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Athlon II X2 250e targets Energy Efficient Legacy Desktop. Direct competitor: Celeron N3160 rivals AMD E2-9010; Athlon II X2 250e rivals Pentium E5700.
| Feature | Celeron N3160 | Athlon II X2 250e |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | Yes | No |
| IGPU Model | Intel HD Graphics 400 | — |
| Unlocked | No | No |
| AVX-512 | No | No |
| Virtualization | true | AMD-V |
| Target Use | — | Energy Efficient Legacy 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 N3160 and Athlon II X2 250e
