Celeron U3400 vs Athlon Neo X2 L325

Celeron U3400

2 Cores2 Thrd18 WWMax: 0.07 GHz2010

Athlon Neo X2 L325

2 Cores2 Thrd1 WWMax: 1.5 GHz2009

Performance Spectrum - CPU

Celeron U3400

2 / 2

575

0.0%

615

+7.0%

Athlon XP 2600+

Athlon XP 3000+

Athlon 64 3100+

Mobile Athlon 64 3400+

Ryzen 7 PRO 6860Z

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3955WX

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7955WX

Ryzen Threadripper 3990X

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 Neo X2 L325 is on rank 1185, so the Celeron U3400 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 U3400

#1160

Atom x5-Z8300

MSRP: $20|Avg: N/A

4386%

#1161

Atom Z3735G

MSRP: $17|Avg: N/A

4321%

#1162

Core i5-480M

MSRP: $81|Avg: $77

3967%

#1163

Core i5-460M

MSRP: $80|Avg: $129

3949%

#1164

Core i5-2540M

MSRP: $266|Avg: $10

3913%

#1166

Core i5-450M

MSRP: $32|Avg: $31

3779%

#1167

Core i3-380M

MSRP: $49|Avg: $25

3623%

#1168

Core i5-430M

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $33

3617%

#1169

Core 2 Duo T6600

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $4

3520%

#1172

Celeron U3400

MSRP: $86|Avg: $5

100%

#1173

Celeron T1600

MSRP: $107|Avg: $15

100%

#1174

Pro A12-8800B

MSRP: $400|Avg: $40

100%

#1176

Core i7-2637M

MSRP: $289|Avg: N/A

98%

#1177

Athlon PRO 3045B

MSRP: $426|Avg: $180

97%

#1178

Core 2 Duo SL9600

MSRP: $316|Avg: N/A

97%

#1179

Core 2 Duo T5600

MSRP: $241|Avg: N/A

97%

#1180

Pentium N3510

MSRP: $161|Avg: $161

97%

#1181

Core i7-7Y75

MSRP: $393|Avg: $285

96%

#1183

Core i7-4500U

MSRP: $398|Avg: N/A

94%

#1185

Athlon Neo X2 L325

MSRP: $100|Avg: $5

92%

#1186

Core i3-2370M

MSRP: $225|Avg: N/A

91%

#1187

Core i3-3217UE

MSRP: $225|Avg: $35

90%

Based on actual market prices and performance synthetic scores.

Performance Per Dollar Athlon Neo X2 L325

#1173

Atom x5-Z8300

MSRP: $20|Avg: N/A

4771%

#1174

Atom Z3735G

MSRP: $17|Avg: N/A

4701%

#1175

Core i5-480M

MSRP: $81|Avg: $77

4315%

#1176

Core i5-460M

MSRP: $80|Avg: $129

4296%

#1177

Core i5-2540M

MSRP: $266|Avg: $10

4257%

#1179

Core i5-450M

MSRP: $32|Avg: $31

4111%

#1180

Core i3-380M

MSRP: $49|Avg: $25

3941%

#1181

Core i5-430M

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $33

3935%

#1182

Core 2 Duo T6600

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $4

3829%

#1185

Athlon Neo X2 L325

MSRP: $100|Avg: $5

100%

#1186

Core i3-2370M

MSRP: $225|Avg: N/A

99%

#1187

Core i3-3217UE

MSRP: $225|Avg: $35

98%

#1188

Celeron T3000

MSRP: $150|Avg: $54

98%

#1189

Core m7-6Y75

MSRP: $393|Avg: $393

98%

#1190

Core M-5Y10

MSRP: $281|Avg: $20

95%

#1193

Celeron 900

MSRP: $86|Avg: $5

92%

#1194

Pentium T3400

MSRP: $150|Avg: $90

92%

#1195

Core 2 Solo SU3500

MSRP: $262|Avg: $15

91%

#1196

Core 2 Duo E8335

MSRP: $200|Avg: $50

89%

#1199

Celeron 560

MSRP: $89|Avg: $5

87%

#1200

Core i3-2312M

MSRP: $225|Avg: N/A

86%

Based on actual market prices and performance synthetic scores.

Performance Comparison

About PassMark

🏆 Chipversus Verdict

🚀 Performance Leadership

Performance Leadership: The Athlon Neo X2 L325 delivers superior performance across the board. It outperforms the Celeron U3400 in both compute-intensive tasks (6.7% faster) and gaming workloads.

Insight	Celeron U3400	Athlon Neo X2 L325
Gaming	❌ Lower gaming performance	✅ Superior gaming performance
Workstation	❌ Weaker in multi-core tasks	✅ Better multi-core power
Price	Equivalent pricing	Equivalent pricing
Longevity	🛑 Legacy (Westmere (2010−2011) / 32 nm)	🛑 Legacy (Congo (2009) / 65 nm)

💎 Value Proposition

Efficiency: Even within a comparison of older hardware, the Athlon Neo X2 L325 stands out as the superior choice. It is effectively 0% cheaper ($5 vs $5) while identifying as the stronger performer.

Insight	Celeron U3400	Athlon Neo X2 L325
Cost Efficiency	❌ Lower cost efficiency	✅ Better overall value (+7%)
Upfront Cost	Equivalent pricing	Equivalent pricing

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.

Celeron U3400 Benchmark Check

Athlon Neo X2 L325 Benchmark Check

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of Celeron U3400 and Athlon Neo X2 L325

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 Neo X2 L325

The Athlon Neo X2 L325 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 2009-01-01. It is based on the Congo (2009) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Max frequency: 1.5 GHz. L2 cache: 1 MB. Built on 65 nm process technology. Socket: ASB1. Thermal design power (TDP): 1 MB. Memory support: DDR2. Passmark benchmark score: 615 points. Launch price was $149.

⚡

Processing Power

Both the Celeron U3400 and Athlon Neo X2 L325 share an identical 2-core/2-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 0.07 GHz on the Celeron U3400 versus 1.5 GHz on the Athlon Neo X2 L325 — a 182.2% clock advantage for the Athlon Neo X2 L325. The Celeron U3400 uses the Westmere (2010−2011) architecture (32 nm), while the Athlon Neo X2 L325 uses Congo (2009) (65 nm). In PassMark, the Celeron U3400 scores 575 against the Athlon Neo X2 L325's 615 — a 6.7% lead for the Athlon Neo X2 L325.

Feature	Celeron U3400	Athlon Neo X2 L325
Cores / Threads	2 / 2	2 / 2
Boost Clock	0.07 GHz	1.5 GHz+2043%
Base Clock	1.06 GHz	—
L3 Cache	2 MB	—
L2 Cache	512 kB	1 MB+100%
Process	32 nm-51%	65 nm
Architecture	Westmere (2010−2011)	Congo (2009)
PassMark	575	615+7%

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Celeron U3400 uses the BGA1288 socket (PCIe 2.0), while the Athlon Neo X2 L325 uses ASB1 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.

Feature	Celeron U3400	Athlon Neo X2 L325
Socket	BGA1288	ASB1
PCIe Generation	PCIe 2.0	PCIe 2.0
Max RAM Speed	—	DDR2-667
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 Neo X2 L325 debuted at $100. At current prices ($5 vs $5), the Athlon Neo X2 L325 is $0 cheaper. In terms of value (PassMark points per dollar), the Celeron U3400 delivers 115.0 pts/$ vs 123.0 pts/$ for the Athlon Neo X2 L325 — making the Athlon Neo X2 L325 the 6.7% better value option.