Celeron U3600 vs Athlon Neo X2 L325

CPU

GPU

Celeron U3600

2 Cores2 Thrd18 WWMax: 0.1 GHz2011

Athlon Neo X2 L325

2 Cores2 Thrd1 WWMax: 1.5 GHz2009

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 Neo X2 L325 is on rank 1185, so the Athlon Neo X2 L325 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 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 Trade-off: The Athlon Neo X2 L325 leads in gaming performance. However, the Celeron U3600 is the stronger candidate for professional workloads, offering 1.6% greater multi-core processing power.

Insight	Celeron U3600	Athlon Neo X2 L325
Gaming	❌ Lower gaming performance	✅ Superior gaming performance
Workstation	✅ Better multi-core power	❌ Weaker in multi-core tasks
Price	⚠️ Higher cost ($134)	✅ More affordable ($5)
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 96% cheaper ($5 vs $134) while identifying as the stronger performer.

Insight	Celeron U3600	Athlon Neo X2 L325
Cost Efficiency	❌ Lower cost efficiency	✅ Better overall value (+2537%)
Upfront Cost	⚠️ Higher cost ($134)	✅ More affordable ($5)

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 Neo X2 L325 Benchmark Check

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of Celeron U3600 and Athlon Neo X2 L325

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 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 U3600 and Athlon Neo X2 L325 share an identical 2-core/2-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 0.1 GHz on the Celeron U3600 versus 1.5 GHz on the Athlon Neo X2 L325 — a 175% clock advantage for the Athlon Neo X2 L325. The Celeron U3600 uses the Westmere (2010−2011) architecture (32 nm), while the Athlon Neo X2 L325 uses Congo (2009) (65 nm). In PassMark, the Celeron U3600 scores 625 against the Athlon Neo X2 L325's 615 — a 1.6% lead for the Celeron U3600.

Feature	Celeron U3600	Athlon Neo X2 L325
Cores / Threads	2 / 2	2 / 2
Boost Clock	0.1 GHz	1.5 GHz+1400%
Base Clock	1.2 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	625+2%	615

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Celeron U3600 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 U3600	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 U3600 launched at $134 MSRP, while the Athlon Neo X2 L325 debuted at $100. At current prices ($134 vs $5), the Athlon Neo X2 L325 is $129 cheaper. In terms of value (PassMark points per dollar), the Celeron U3600 delivers 4.7 pts/$ vs 123.0 pts/$ for the Athlon Neo X2 L325 — making the Athlon Neo X2 L325 the 185.4% better value option.