
Celeron SU2300 vs Athlon II Neo K145

Celeron SU2300

Athlon II Neo K145
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 SU2300 is positioned at rank 1223 and the Athlon II Neo K145 is on rank 1048, so the Athlon II Neo K145 offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar Celeron SU2300
Performance Per Dollar Athlon II Neo K145
Performance Comparison
About PassMark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
| Insight | Celeron SU2300 | Athlon II Neo K145 |
|---|---|---|
| Gaming | ❌ Lower gaming performance | ✅ Superior gaming performance |
| Workstation | ❌ Weaker in multi-core tasks | ✅ Better multi-core power |
| Price | ⚠️ Higher cost ($134) | ✅ More affordable ($10) |
| Longevity | 🛑 Legacy (Legacy / 45 nm) | 🛑 Legacy (Nile (2010) / 45 nm) |
💎 Value Proposition
| Insight | Celeron SU2300 | Athlon II Neo K145 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ❌ Lower cost efficiency | ✅ Better overall value (+1289%) |
| Upfront Cost | ⚠️ Higher cost ($134) | ✅ More affordable ($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 SU2300 and Athlon II Neo K145

Celeron SU2300
The Celeron SU2300 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 2007-01-01. Base frequency: 1.2 GHz. L3 cache: 1 MB. Built on 45 nm process technology. Socket: BGA956. Thermal design power (TDP): 10 Watt. Passmark benchmark score: 545 points. Launch price was $69.

Athlon II Neo K145
The Athlon II Neo K145 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 2009-01-01. It is based on the Nile (2010) architecture. It features 1 cores and 1 threads. Max frequency: 1.8 GHz. L2 cache: 1 MB. Built on 45 nm process technology. Socket: S1. Thermal design power (TDP): 1 MB. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 565 points. Launch price was $149.
Processing Power
The Athlon II Neo K145 is built on the Nile (2010) architecture. In PassMark, the Celeron SU2300 scores 545 against the Athlon II Neo K145's 565 — a 3.6% lead for the Athlon II Neo K145.
| Feature | Celeron SU2300 | Athlon II Neo K145 |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | — | 1 / 1 |
| Boost Clock | — | 1.8 GHz |
| Base Clock | 1.2 GHz | — |
| L3 Cache | 1 MB | — |
| L2 Cache | — | 1 MB |
| Process | 45 nm | 45 nm |
| Architecture | — | Nile (2010) |
| PassMark | 545 | 565+4% |
Memory & Platform
The Celeron SU2300 uses the BGA956 socket (PCIe 2.0), while the Athlon II Neo K145 uses S1 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.
| Feature | Celeron SU2300 | Athlon II Neo K145 |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | BGA956 | S1 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 2.0 | PCIe 2.0 |
| Max RAM Speed | — | DDR3-1066 |
| Max RAM Capacity | — | 4 GB |
| RAM Channels | — | 2 |
| ECC Support | — | ❌ |
| PCIe Lanes | — | 0 |
Value Analysis
The Celeron SU2300 launched at $134 MSRP, while the Athlon II Neo K145 debuted at $50. At current prices ($134 vs $10), the Athlon II Neo K145 is $124 cheaper. In terms of value (PassMark points per dollar), the Celeron SU2300 delivers 4.1 pts/$ vs 56.5 pts/$ for the Athlon II Neo K145 — making the Athlon II Neo K145 the 173.1% better value option.
| Feature | Celeron SU2300 | Athlon II Neo K145 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $134 | $50-63% |
| Avg Price (30d) | $134 | $10-93% |
| Performance per Dollar | 4.1 | 56.5+1278% |
| Release Date | 2009 | 2010 |
Top Performing CPUs
The most powerful cpus ranked by PassMark CPU Mark benchmark scores.
















