Mobile Athlon 64 3000+ vs Celeron 430
Mobile Athlon 64 3000+
Celeron 430
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 Mobile Athlon 64 3000+ is positioned at rank 980 and the Celeron 430 is on rank 1010, so the Mobile Athlon 64 3000+ offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar Mobile Athlon 64 3000+
Performance Per Dollar Celeron 430
Performance Comparison
About PassMark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
| Insight | Mobile Athlon 64 3000+ | Celeron 430 |
|---|---|---|
| Gaming | ✅ Superior gaming performance | ❌ Lower gaming performance |
| Workstation | ✅ Better multi-core power | ❌ Weaker in multi-core tasks |
| Price | ✅ More affordable ($0) | ⚠️ Higher cost ($10) |
| Longevity | 🛑 Legacy (Oakville (2003−2004) / Standard Node) | 🛑 Legacy (Conroe-L (2007−2008) / 65 nm) |
💎 Value Proposition
| Insight | Mobile Athlon 64 3000+ | Celeron 430 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ❌ Lower cost efficiency | ❌ Lower cost efficiency |
| Upfront Cost | ✅ More affordable ($0) | ⚠️ 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 Mobile Athlon 64 3000+ and Celeron 430
Mobile Athlon 64 3000+
The Mobile Athlon 64 3000+ is manufactured by AMD. It was released in Agosto 2003 (22 years ago). It is based on the Oakville (2003−2004) architecture. It features 1 cores and 1 threads. Max frequency: 2 GHz. L2 cache: 512K. Socket: 754. Thermal design power (TDP): 512 kB. Memory support: DDR1. Passmark benchmark score: 450 points. Launch price was $69.
Celeron 430
The Celeron 430 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 3 June 2007 (18 years ago). It is based on the Conroe-L (2007−2008) architecture. It features 1 cores and 1 threads. Base frequency is 1.8 GHz, with boost up to 1.8 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 512 kB. Built on 65 nm process technology. Socket: LGA775. Thermal design power (TDP): 35 Watt. Memory support: DDR1, DDR2, DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 448 points. Launch price was $50.
Processing Power
Both the Mobile Athlon 64 3000+ and Celeron 430 share an identical 1-core/1-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 2 GHz on the Mobile Athlon 64 3000+ versus 1.8 GHz on the Celeron 430 — a 10.5% clock advantage for the Mobile Athlon 64 3000+. The Mobile Athlon 64 3000+ uses the Oakville (2003−2004) architecture, while the Celeron 430 uses Conroe-L (2007−2008) (65 nm). In PassMark, the Mobile Athlon 64 3000+ scores 450 against the Celeron 430's 448 — a 0.4% lead for the Mobile Athlon 64 3000+.
| Feature | Mobile Athlon 64 3000+ | Celeron 430 |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 1 / 1 | 1 / 1 |
| Boost Clock | 2 GHz+11% | 1.8 GHz |
| Base Clock | — | 1.8 GHz |
| L3 Cache | — | 0 kB |
| L2 Cache | 512K | 512 kB |
| Process | — | 65 nm |
| Architecture | Oakville (2003−2004) | Conroe-L (2007−2008) |
| PassMark | 450 | 448 |
| Geekbench 6 Single | — | 226 |
Memory & Platform
The Mobile Athlon 64 3000+ uses the 754 socket (PCIe 1.1), while the Celeron 430 uses LGA775 (PCIe 1.1) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches 400 on the Mobile Athlon 64 3000+ versus DDR2-800 on the Celeron 430 — the Mobile Athlon 64 3000+ supports 198% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The Celeron 430 supports up to 4 GB of RAM compared to 2 — 66.7% more capacity for professional workloads. Memory channels: 1 (Mobile Athlon 64 3000+) vs 2 (Celeron 430). Both provide 0 PCIe lanes. Chipset compatibility: 754 (Mobile Athlon 64 3000+) and 945,G31,G41 (Celeron 430).
| Feature | Mobile Athlon 64 3000+ | Celeron 430 |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | 754 | LGA775 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 1.1 | PCIe 1.1 |
| Max RAM Speed | 400+19900% | DDR2-800 |
| Max RAM Capacity | 2 | 4 GB+209715100% |
| RAM Channels | 1 | 2+100% |
| ECC Support | ❌ | ❌ |
| PCIe Lanes | 0 | 0 |
Advanced Features
Neither processor supports overclocking. Virtualization support: false (Mobile Athlon 64 3000+) vs No (Celeron 430). Primary use case: Celeron 430 targets Budget. Direct competitor: Mobile Athlon 64 3000+ rivals Pentium M 735; Celeron 430 rivals Pentium 4 2.80.
| Feature | Mobile Athlon 64 3000+ | Celeron 430 |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | No | No |
| IGPU Model | None | — |
| Unlocked | No | No |
| AVX-512 | No | No |
| Virtualization | false | No |
| Target Use | — | Budget |
Top Performing CPUs
The most powerful cpus ranked by PassMark CPU Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar CPU comparisons based on Mobile Athlon 64 3000+ and Celeron 430
