Celeron U3400 vs Athlon II Neo K145
Celeron U3400
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 U3400 is positioned at rank 1172 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 U3400
Performance Per Dollar Athlon II Neo K145
Performance Comparison
About PassMark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
| Insight | Celeron U3400 | Athlon II Neo K145 |
|---|---|---|
| Gaming | ❌ Lower gaming performance | ✅ Superior gaming performance |
| Workstation | ✅ Better multi-core power | ❌ Weaker in multi-core tasks |
| Price | ✅ More affordable ($5) | ⚠️ Higher cost ($10) |
| Longevity | 🛑 Legacy (Westmere (2010−2011) / 32 nm) | 🛑 Legacy (Nile (2010) / 45 nm) |
💎 Value Proposition
| Insight | Celeron U3400 | Athlon II Neo K145 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ✅ Better overall value (+104%) | ❌ Lower cost efficiency |
| Upfront Cost | ✅ More affordable ($5) | ⚠️ 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 U3400 and Athlon II Neo K145
Celeron U3400
The Celeron U3400 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 2007-01-01. It is based on the Westmere (2010−2011) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 1.06 GHz, with boost up to 0.07 GHz. L3 cache: 2 MB. L2 cache: 512 kB. Built on 32 nm process technology. Socket: BGA1288. Thermal design power (TDP): 18 Watt. Memory support: DDR3-800. Passmark benchmark score: 575 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 Celeron U3400 packs 2 cores / 2 threads, while the Athlon II Neo K145 offers 1 cores / 1 threads — the Celeron U3400 has 1 more core. Boost clocks reach 0.07 GHz on the Celeron U3400 versus 1.8 GHz on the Athlon II Neo K145 — a 185% clock advantage for the Athlon II Neo K145. The Celeron U3400 uses the Westmere (2010−2011) architecture (32 nm), while the Athlon II Neo K145 uses Nile (2010) (45 nm). In PassMark, the Celeron U3400 scores 575 against the Athlon II Neo K145's 565 — a 1.8% lead for the Celeron U3400.
| Feature | Celeron U3400 | Athlon II Neo K145 |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 2 / 2+100% | 1 / 1 |
| Boost Clock | 0.07 GHz | 1.8 GHz+2471% |
| Base Clock | 1.06 GHz | — |
| L3 Cache | 2 MB | — |
| L2 Cache | 512 kB | 1 MB+100% |
| Process | 32 nm-29% | 45 nm |
| Architecture | Westmere (2010−2011) | Nile (2010) |
| PassMark | 575+2% | 565 |
Memory & Platform
The Celeron U3400 uses the BGA1288 socket (PCIe 2.0), while the Athlon II Neo K145 uses S1 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.
| Feature | Celeron U3400 | Athlon II Neo K145 |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | BGA1288 | 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 U3400 launched at $86 MSRP, while the Athlon II Neo K145 debuted at $50. At current prices ($5 vs $10), the Celeron U3400 is $5 cheaper. In terms of value (PassMark points per dollar), the Celeron U3400 delivers 115.0 pts/$ vs 56.5 pts/$ for the Athlon II Neo K145 — making the Celeron U3400 the 68.2% better value option.
| Feature | Celeron U3400 | Athlon II Neo K145 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $86 | $50-42% |
| Avg Price (30d) | $5-50% | $10 |
| Performance per Dollar | 115.0+104% | 56.5 |
| Release Date | 2010 | 2010 |
Top Performing CPUs
The most powerful cpus ranked by PassMark CPU Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar CPU comparisons based on Celeron U3400 and Athlon II Neo K145
