Celeron U3600 vs Athlon 64 FX-51

Celeron U3600

2 Cores2 Thrd18 WWMax: 0.1 GHz2011

Athlon 64 FX-51

1 Cores1 Thrd89 WWMax: 2.2 GHz2003

Performance Spectrum - CPU

Celeron U3600

2 / 2

625

+1.6%

615

0.0%

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 U3600 is positioned at rank 1213 and the Athlon 64 FX-51 is on rank 1133, so the Athlon 64 FX-51 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 U3600

#1201

Atom x5-Z8300

MSRP: $20|Avg: N/A

6296%

#1202

Atom Z3735G

MSRP: $17|Avg: N/A

6204%

#1203

Core i5-480M

MSRP: $81|Avg: $77

5695%

#1204

Core i5-460M

MSRP: $80|Avg: $129

5670%

#1205

Core i5-2540M

MSRP: $266|Avg: $10

5618%

#1207

Core i5-450M

MSRP: $32|Avg: $31

5425%

#1208

Core i3-380M

MSRP: $49|Avg: $25

5202%

#1209

Core i5-430M

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $33

5193%

#1210

Core 2 Duo T6600

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $4

5054%

#1213

Celeron U3600

MSRP: $134|Avg: $134

100%

#1216

Core 2 Quad Q9000

MSRP: $348|Avg: $15

98%

#1217

Core i5-2537M

MSRP: $250|Avg: N/A

98%

#1218

Core i7-720QM

MSRP: $364|Avg: N/A

98%

#1219

Pentium U5400

MSRP: $289|Avg: $214

95%

#1220

Pentium T2330

MSRP: $150|Avg: $7

95%

#1221

Z-01

MSRP: $50|Avg: $10

92%

#1222

Pentium T2310

MSRP: $150|Avg: $14

89%

#1223

Celeron SU2300

MSRP: $134|Avg: $134

87%

#1224

Core i5-560UM

MSRP: $250|Avg: N/A

87%

#1225

Core i7-660UM

MSRP: $317|Avg: N/A

86%

#1226

C-30

MSRP: $50|Avg: $15

86%

#1228

Core i7-620UM

MSRP: $278|Avg: N/A

84%

Based on actual market prices and performance synthetic scores.

Performance Per Dollar Athlon 64 FX-51

Ryzen 9 7950X

MSRP: $194|Avg: $20

371089%

Core i9-10900T

MSRP: $120|Avg: $5

350643%

Ryzen 3 PRO 4355GE

MSRP: $423|Avg: $5

254595%

Ryzen Threadripper 3960X

MSRP: $1399|Avg: $85

76699%

Ryzen 9 9950X

MSRP: $649|Avg: $129

60754%

Ryzen 5 8400F

MSRP: $303|Avg: $55

53148%

Ryzen 7 PRO 2700

MSRP: $299|Avg: $60

30440%

Ryzen 5 2600X

MSRP: $229|Avg: $55

30043%

Ryzen 3 PRO 5350G

MSRP: $150|Avg: $60

27355%

#10

Core Ultra 5 245KF

MSRP: $294|Avg: $189

27352%

#11

Ryzen 5 5500

MSRP: $159|Avg: $85

27046%

#12

Ryzen 5 3600

MSRP: $199|Avg: $80

26317%

#13

Core i3-9100E

MSRP: $202|Avg: $30

25949%

#14

Core Ultra 5 245K

MSRP: $319|Avg: $200

25844%

#15

Core i3-8300T

MSRP: $138|Avg: $25

25610%

#1133

Athlon 64 FX-51

MSRP: $733|Avg: $733

100%

#1134

Athlon 64 FX-55

MSRP: $827|Avg: $50

99%

#1135

Athlon 64 FX-53

MSRP: $799|Avg: $15

96%

#1136

Athlon XP 2000+

MSRP: $339|Avg: $40

88%

#1137

Athlon 64 FX-57

MSRP: $1031|Avg: $200

83%

#1138

Athlon XP 3000+

MSRP: $588|Avg: $20

82%

#1139

Athlon XP 2100+

MSRP: $420|Avg: $30

75%

#1140

Pentium III 1266S

MSRP: $369|Avg: $20

68%

#1141

Pentium 4 1.80

MSRP: $562|Avg: $40

48%

#1142

Pentium III 1133

MSRP: $990|Avg: $30

21%

Based on actual market prices and performance synthetic scores.

Performance Comparison

About PassMark

🏆 Chipversus Verdict

🚀 Performance Leadership

Generational Difference: This comparison involves processors from different technological eras. The Celeron U3600 (2011) utilizes 32 nm technology and DDR3-800, providing a fundamental performance advantage.

Insight	Celeron U3600	Athlon 64 FX-51
Gaming	❌ Lower gaming performance	✅ Superior gaming performance
Workstation	✅ Better multi-core power	❌ Weaker in multi-core tasks
Price	✅ More affordable ($134)	⚠️ Higher cost ($733)
Longevity	🛑 Legacy (Westmere (2010−2011) / 32 nm)	🛑 Legacy (SledgeHammer (2003−2005) / 130 nm)

💎 Value Proposition

The Athlon 64 FX-51 (2003) relies on 130 nm technology and older memory, placing it in a different performance category relative to modern standards.

Insight	Celeron U3600	Athlon 64 FX-51
Cost Efficiency	✅ Better overall value (+456%)	❌ Lower cost efficiency
Upfront Cost	✅ More affordable ($134)	⚠️ Higher cost ($733)

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 U3600 Benchmark Check

Athlon 64 FX-51 Benchmark Check

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of Celeron U3600 and Athlon 64 FX-51

Celeron U3600

The Celeron U3600 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 1.2 GHz, with boost up to 0.1 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: 625 points. Launch price was $69.

Athlon 64 FX-51

The Athlon 64 FX-51 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 2009-01-01. It is based on the SledgeHammer (2003−2005) architecture. It features 1 cores and 1 threads. Max frequency: 2.2 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 1 MB. Built on 130 nm process technology. Socket: 940. Thermal design power (TDP): 89 Watt. Passmark benchmark score: 615 points. Launch price was $149.

⚡

Processing Power

The Celeron U3600 packs 2 cores / 2 threads, while the Athlon 64 FX-51 offers 1 cores / 1 threads — the Celeron U3600 has 1 more core. Boost clocks reach 0.1 GHz on the Celeron U3600 versus 2.2 GHz on the Athlon 64 FX-51 — a 182.6% clock advantage for the Athlon 64 FX-51. The Celeron U3600 uses the Westmere (2010−2011) architecture (32 nm), while the Athlon 64 FX-51 uses SledgeHammer (2003−2005) (130 nm). In PassMark, the Celeron U3600 scores 625 against the Athlon 64 FX-51's 615 — a 1.6% lead for the Celeron U3600. L3 cache: 2 MB on the Celeron U3600 vs 0 kB on the Athlon 64 FX-51.

Feature	Celeron U3600	Athlon 64 FX-51
Cores / Threads	2 / 2+100%	1 / 1
Boost Clock	0.1 GHz	2.2 GHz+2100%
Base Clock	1.2 GHz	—
L3 Cache	2 MB	0 kB
L2 Cache	512 kB	1 MB+100%
Process	32 nm-75%	130 nm
Architecture	Westmere (2010−2011)	SledgeHammer (2003−2005)
PassMark	625+2%	615

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Celeron U3600 uses the BGA1288 socket (PCIe 2.0), while the Athlon 64 FX-51 uses 940 (PCIe 1.1) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.

Feature	Celeron U3600	Athlon 64 FX-51
Socket	BGA1288	940
PCIe Generation	PCIe 2.0+82%	PCIe 1.1
Max RAM Speed	—	DDR-400
Max RAM Capacity	—	4 GB
RAM Channels	—	2
ECC Support	—	✅
PCIe Lanes	—	0

💰

Value Analysis

The Celeron U3600 launched at $134 MSRP, while the Athlon 64 FX-51 debuted at $733. At current prices ($134 vs $733), the Celeron U3600 is $599 cheaper. In terms of value (PassMark points per dollar), the Celeron U3600 delivers 4.7 pts/$ vs 0.8 pts/$ for the Athlon 64 FX-51 — making the Celeron U3600 the 139% better value option.