Mobile Athlon 64 3200+ vs Celeron 925
Mobile Athlon 64 3200+
Celeron 925
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 3200+ is positioned at rank 1079 and the Celeron 925 is on rank 1202, so the Mobile Athlon 64 3200+ 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 3200+
Performance Per Dollar Celeron 925
Performance Comparison
About PassMark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
| Insight | Mobile Athlon 64 3200+ | Celeron 925 |
|---|---|---|
| Gaming | ✅ Superior gaming performance | ❌ Lower gaming performance |
| Workstation | ❌ Weaker in multi-core tasks | ✅ Better multi-core power |
| Price | ✅ More affordable ($0) | ⚠️ Higher cost ($100) |
| Longevity | 🛑 Legacy (Newark (2003) / Standard Node) | 🛑 Legacy (Legacy / 45 nm) |
💎 Value Proposition
| Insight | Mobile Athlon 64 3200+ | Celeron 925 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ❌ Lower cost efficiency | ❌ Lower cost efficiency |
| Upfront Cost | ✅ More affordable ($0) | ⚠️ Higher cost ($100) |
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 3200+ and Celeron 925
Mobile Athlon 64 3200+
The Mobile Athlon 64 3200+ is manufactured by AMD. It was released in Agosto 2003 (22 years ago). It is based on the Newark (2003) architecture. It features 1 cores and 1 threads. Max frequency: 2 GHz. L2 cache: 1 MB. Socket: 754. Thermal design power (TDP): 1 MB. Memory support: DDR1. Passmark benchmark score: 505 points. Launch price was $69.
Celeron 925
The Celeron 925 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 2007-01-01. Base frequency: 2.3 GHz. L3 cache: 1 MB L2 Cache. Built on 45 nm process technology. Thermal design power (TDP): 35 Watt. Passmark benchmark score: 525 points. Launch price was $69.
Processing Power
The Mobile Athlon 64 3200+ is built on the Newark (2003) architecture. In PassMark, the Mobile Athlon 64 3200+ scores 505 against the Celeron 925's 525 — a 3.9% lead for the Celeron 925.
| Feature | Mobile Athlon 64 3200+ | Celeron 925 |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 1 / 1 | — |
| Boost Clock | 2 GHz | — |
| Base Clock | — | 2.3 GHz |
| L3 Cache | — | 1 MB L2 Cache |
| L2 Cache | 1 MB | — |
| Process | — | 45 nm |
| Architecture | Newark (2003) | — |
| PassMark | 505 | 525+4% |
Memory & Platform
Maximum memory speed reaches 400 on the Mobile Athlon 64 3200+ versus DDR3-1333 on the Celeron 925 — the Mobile Athlon 64 3200+ supports 197% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The Celeron 925 supports up to 4 GB of RAM compared to 2 — 66.7% more capacity for professional workloads. Both feature 1-channel memory with ECC support. Both provide 0 PCIe lanes. Chipset compatibility: 754 (Mobile Athlon 64 3200+) and GL40,GM45 (Celeron 925).
| Feature | Mobile Athlon 64 3200+ | Celeron 925 |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | 754 | — |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 1.1 | PCIe 2.0+82% |
| Max RAM Speed | 400+13233% | DDR3-1333 |
| Max RAM Capacity | 2 | 4 GB+209715100% |
| RAM Channels | 1 | 1 |
| ECC Support | ❌ | ❌ |
| PCIe Lanes | 0 | 0 |
Advanced Features
Neither processor supports overclocking. Virtualization support: false (Mobile Athlon 64 3200+) vs No (Celeron 925). Primary use case: Celeron 925 targets Budget. Direct competitor: Mobile Athlon 64 3200+ rivals Pentium M 735; Celeron 925 rivals Pentium 4 2.80.
| Feature | Mobile Athlon 64 3200+ | Celeron 925 |
|---|---|---|
| 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 3200+ and Celeron 925
