Celeron U3400
VS
Turion 64 MT-40

Celeron U3400 vs Turion 64 MT-40

Intel

Celeron U3400

2 Cores2 Thrd18 WWMax: 0.07 GHz2010
VS
AMD

Turion 64 MT-40

1 Cores1 Thrd1 WWMax: 2.2 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 U3400 is positioned at rank 1172 and the Turion 64 MT-40 is on rank 880, so the Turion 64 MT-40 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 Turion 64 MT-40

#867
Atom x5-Z8300
MSRP: $20|Avg: N/A
1467%
#868
Atom Z3735G
MSRP: $17|Avg: N/A
1446%
#869
Core i5-480M
MSRP: $81|Avg: $77
1327%
#870
Core i5-460M
MSRP: $80|Avg: $129
1321%
#871
Core i5-2540M
MSRP: $266|Avg: $10
1309%
#873
Core i5-450M
MSRP: $32|Avg: $31
1264%
#874
Core i3-380M
MSRP: $49|Avg: $25
1212%
#875
Core i5-430M
MSRP: N/A|Avg: $33
1210%
#876
Core 2 Duo T6600
MSRP: N/A|Avg: $4
1178%
#880
Turion 64 MT-40
MSRP: N/A|Avg: N/A
100%
#881
Celeron Dual-Core T1600
MSRP: $150|Avg: $150
100%
#883
Athlon II N330
MSRP: $100|Avg: $50
100%
#888
Core i7-7820EQ
MSRP: $378|Avg: $378
99%
#889
Celeron 7305
MSRP: $128|Avg: $107
98%
#890
E-300
MSRP: $60|Avg: $20
98%
#891
Core i7-7820HK
MSRP: $378|Avg: N/A
98%
#894
Pentium B940
MSRP: $134|Avg: $11
97%
Based on actual market prices and performance synthetic scores.

Performance Comparison

About PassMark

🏆 Chipversus Verdict

🚀 Performance Leadership

Performance Leadership: The Turion 64 MT-40 delivers superior performance across the board. It outperforms the Celeron U3400 in both compute-intensive tasks (4.3% faster) and gaming workloads.
InsightCeleron U3400Turion 64 MT-40
Gaming
Lower gaming performance
Superior gaming performance
Workstation
Weaker in multi-core tasks
Better multi-core power
Price
⚠️ Higher cost ($5)
More affordable ($0)
Longevity
🛑 Legacy (Westmere (2010−2011) / 32 nm)
🛑 Legacy (Lancaster (2005−2006) / 90 nm)

💎 Value Proposition

InsightCeleron U3400Turion 64 MT-40
Cost Efficiency
Lower cost efficiency
Lower cost efficiency
Upfront Cost
⚠️ Higher cost ($5)
More affordable ($0)

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 U3400 and Turion 64 MT-40

Intel

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.

AMD

Turion 64 MT-40

The Turion 64 MT-40 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 2007-01-01. It is based on the Lancaster (2005−2006) architecture. It features 1 cores and 1 threads. Max frequency: 2.2 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 1 MB. Built on 90 nm process technology. Socket: 754. Thermal design power (TDP): 1 MB. Passmark benchmark score: 600 points. Launch price was $69.

Processing Power

The Celeron U3400 packs 2 cores / 2 threads, while the Turion 64 MT-40 offers 1 cores / 1 threads — the Celeron U3400 has 1 more core. Boost clocks reach 0.07 GHz on the Celeron U3400 versus 2.2 GHz on the Turion 64 MT-40 — a 187.7% clock advantage for the Turion 64 MT-40. The Celeron U3400 uses the Westmere (2010−2011) architecture (32 nm), while the Turion 64 MT-40 uses Lancaster (2005−2006) (90 nm). In PassMark, the Celeron U3400 scores 575 against the Turion 64 MT-40's 600 — a 4.3% lead for the Turion 64 MT-40. L3 cache: 2 MB on the Celeron U3400 vs 0 kB on the Turion 64 MT-40.

FeatureCeleron U3400Turion 64 MT-40
Cores / Threads
2 / 2+100%
1 / 1
Boost Clock
0.07 GHz
2.2 GHz+3043%
Base Clock
1.06 GHz
L3 Cache
2 MB
0 kB
L2 Cache
512 kB
1 MB+100%
Process
32 nm-64%
90 nm
Architecture
Westmere (2010−2011)
Lancaster (2005−2006)
PassMark
575
600+4%
🧠

Memory & Platform

The Celeron U3400 uses the BGA1288 socket (PCIe 2.0), while the Turion 64 MT-40 uses 754 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.

FeatureCeleron U3400Turion 64 MT-40
Socket
BGA1288
754
PCIe Generation
PCIe 2.0
PCIe 2.0