Mobile Sempron 3300+ vs Celeron 2.60
Mobile Sempron 3300+
Celeron 2.60
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 Sempron 3300+ is positioned at rank 1148 and the Celeron 2.60 is on rank 1045, so the Celeron 2.60 offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar Mobile Sempron 3300+
Performance Per Dollar Celeron 2.60
Performance Comparison
About PassMark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
| Insight | Mobile Sempron 3300+ | Celeron 2.60 |
|---|---|---|
| Gaming | ❌ Lower gaming performance | ✅ Superior gaming performance |
| Workstation | ❌ Weaker in multi-core tasks | ✅ Better multi-core power |
| Price | ✅ More affordable ($0) | ⚠️ Higher cost ($10) |
| Longevity | 🛑 Legacy (Roma (2005) / 90 nm) | 🛑 Legacy (Northwood (2002−2004) / 130 nm) |
💎 Value Proposition
| Insight | Mobile Sempron 3300+ | Celeron 2.60 |
|---|---|---|
| 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 Sempron 3300+ and Celeron 2.60
Mobile Sempron 3300+
The Mobile Sempron 3300+ is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 1 June 2005 (20 years ago). It is based on the Roma (2005) architecture. It features 1 cores and 1 threads. Max frequency: 2 GHz. L2 cache: 128 kB. Built on 90 nm process technology. Socket: 745. Thermal design power (TDP): 128 kB. Passmark benchmark score: 376 points. Launch price was $69.
Celeron 2.60
The Celeron 2.60 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 2007-01-01. It is based on the Northwood (2002−2004) architecture. It features 1 cores and 1 threads. Max frequency: 2.6 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 128 kB. Built on 130 nm process technology. Socket: PGA478. Thermal design power (TDP): 73 Watt. Memory support: DDR1, DDR2. Passmark benchmark score: 385 points. Launch price was $69.
Processing Power
Both the Mobile Sempron 3300+ and Celeron 2.60 share an identical 1-core/1-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 2 GHz on the Mobile Sempron 3300+ versus 2.6 GHz on the Celeron 2.60 — a 26.1% clock advantage for the Celeron 2.60. The Mobile Sempron 3300+ uses the Roma (2005) architecture (90 nm), while the Celeron 2.60 uses Northwood (2002−2004) (130 nm). In PassMark, the Mobile Sempron 3300+ scores 376 against the Celeron 2.60's 385 — a 2.4% lead for the Celeron 2.60.
| Feature | Mobile Sempron 3300+ | Celeron 2.60 |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 1 / 1 | 1 / 1 |
| Boost Clock | 2 GHz | 2.6 GHz+30% |
| L3 Cache | — | 0 kB |
| L2 Cache | 128 kB | 128 kB |
| Process | 90 nm-31% | 130 nm |
| Architecture | Roma (2005) | Northwood (2002−2004) |
| PassMark | 376 | 385+2% |
Memory & Platform
The Mobile Sempron 3300+ uses the 745 socket (PCIe 2.0), while the Celeron 2.60 uses PGA478 (PCIe 1.1) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.
| Feature | Mobile Sempron 3300+ | Celeron 2.60 |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | 745 | PGA478 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 2.0+82% | PCIe 1.1 |
| Max RAM Speed | — | DDR2-400 |
| Max RAM Capacity | — | 4 GB |
| RAM Channels | — | 1 |
| ECC Support | — | ❌ |
| PCIe Lanes | — | 0 |
Advanced Features
Virtualization: not specified (Mobile Sempron 3300+) / No (Celeron 2.60). Primary use case: Celeron 2.60 targets Budget. Direct competitor: Celeron 2.60 rivals Pentium 4 2.40.
| Feature | Mobile Sempron 3300+ | Celeron 2.60 |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | — | No |
| Unlocked | — | No |
| AVX-512 | — | No |
| Virtualization | — | 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 Sempron 3300+ and Celeron 2.60
