Opteron 148
VS
Celeron U3400

Opteron 148 vs Celeron U3400

AMD

Opteron 148

1 Cores1 Thrd85 WWMax: 2.2 GHz2005
VS
Intel

Celeron U3400

2 Cores2 Thrd18 WWMax: 0.07 GHz2010

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 Opteron 148 is positioned at rank 754 and the Celeron U3400 is on rank 1172, so the Opteron 148 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 Opteron 148

#1
Xeon Platinum 8454H
MSRP: $6540|Avg: N/A
15170%
#6
Xeon Gold 6240R
MSRP: $2444|Avg: N/A
2864%
#10
Xeon 6337P
MSRP: $60|Avg: $5
2545%
#15
EPYC 9174F
MSRP: $194|Avg: $30
1966%
#435
Xeon Gold 6354
MSRP: $2878|Avg: $2898
100%
#436
Xeon Gold 5218T
MSRP: $1572|Avg: $1349
99%
#437
Xeon 6960P
MSRP: $9625|Avg: $9625
99%
#438
EPYC 9555
MSRP: $9826|Avg: $7973
99%
#439
Xeon Gold 6338
MSRP: $2990|Avg: $1604
98%
#440
Xeon Gold 6538N
MSRP: $3351|Avg: $170
98%
#441
EPYC 7F52
MSRP: $3100|Avg: $1826
97%
#442
EPYC 7542
MSRP: $3400|Avg: $899
97%
#443
EPYC 9655
MSRP: $11852|Avg: $11852
96%
#754
Opteron 148
MSRP: N/A|Avg: N/A
100%
#757
Xeon E3-1281 v3
MSRP: $555|Avg: $636
100%
#767
Xeon E3-1270L v4
MSRP: $581|Avg: $636
96%
Based on actual market prices and performance synthetic scores.

Performance Per Dollar Celeron U3400

#1160
Atom x5-Z8300
MSRP: $20|Avg: N/A
4386%
#1161
Atom Z3735G
MSRP: $17|Avg: N/A
4321%
#1162
Core i5-480M
MSRP: $81|Avg: $77
3967%
#1163
Core i5-460M
MSRP: $80|Avg: $129
3949%
#1164
Core i5-2540M
MSRP: $266|Avg: $10
3913%
#1166
Core i5-450M
MSRP: $32|Avg: $31
3779%
#1167
Core i3-380M
MSRP: $49|Avg: $25
3623%
#1168
Core i5-430M
MSRP: N/A|Avg: $33
3617%
#1169
Core 2 Duo T6600
MSRP: N/A|Avg: $4
3520%
#1172
Celeron U3400
MSRP: $86|Avg: $5
100%
#1173
Celeron T1600
MSRP: $107|Avg: $15
100%
#1174
Pro A12-8800B
MSRP: $400|Avg: $40
100%
#1176
Core i7-2637M
MSRP: $289|Avg: N/A
98%
#1177
Athlon PRO 3045B
MSRP: $426|Avg: $180
97%
#1178
Core 2 Duo SL9600
MSRP: $316|Avg: N/A
97%
#1179
Core 2 Duo T5600
MSRP: $241|Avg: N/A
97%
#1180
Pentium N3510
MSRP: $161|Avg: $161
97%
#1181
Core i7-7Y75
MSRP: $393|Avg: $285
96%
#1183
Core i7-4500U
MSRP: $398|Avg: N/A
94%
#1185
Athlon Neo X2 L325
MSRP: $100|Avg: $5
92%
#1186
Core i3-2370M
MSRP: $225|Avg: N/A
91%
#1187
Core i3-3217UE
MSRP: $225|Avg: $35
90%
Based on actual market prices and performance synthetic scores.

Performance Comparison

About PassMark

🏆 Chipversus Verdict

🚀 Performance Leadership

Performance Trade-off: The Opteron 148 leads in gaming performance. However, the Celeron U3400 is the stronger candidate for professional workloads, offering 4.8% greater multi-core processing power.
InsightOpteron 148Celeron U3400
Gaming
Superior gaming performance
Lower gaming performance
Workstation
Weaker in multi-core tasks
Better multi-core power
Price
More affordable ($0)
⚠️ Higher cost ($5)
Longevity
🛑 Legacy (SledgeHammer (2003−2005) / 130 nm)
🛑 Legacy (Westmere (2010−2011) / 32 nm)

💎 Value Proposition

InsightOpteron 148Celeron U3400
Cost Efficiency
Lower cost efficiency
Lower cost efficiency
Upfront Cost
More affordable ($0)
⚠️ Higher cost ($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.

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of Opteron 148 and Celeron U3400

AMD

Opteron 148

The Opteron 148 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 2015-01-01. It is based on the SledgeHammer (2003−2005) architecture. It features 1 cores and 1 threads. Base frequency is 2.2 GHz, with boost up to 2.2 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 1 MB. Built on 130 nm process technology. Socket: 939. Thermal design power (TDP): 85 Watt. Memory support: DDR1. Passmark benchmark score: 548 points. Launch price was $800.

Intel

Celeron U3400

The Celeron U3400 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 1.06 GHz, with boost up to 0.07 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: 575 points. Launch price was $69.

Processing Power

The Opteron 148 packs 1 cores / 1 threads, while the Celeron U3400 offers 2 cores / 2 threads — the Celeron U3400 has 1 more core. Boost clocks reach 2.2 GHz on the Opteron 148 versus 0.07 GHz on the Celeron U3400 — a 187.7% clock advantage for the Opteron 148 (base: 2.2 GHz vs 1.06 GHz). The Opteron 148 uses the SledgeHammer (2003−2005) architecture (130 nm), while the Celeron U3400 uses Westmere (2010−2011) (32 nm). In PassMark, the Opteron 148 scores 548 against the Celeron U3400's 575 — a 4.8% lead for the Celeron U3400. L3 cache: 0 kB on the Opteron 148 vs 2 MB on the Celeron U3400.

FeatureOpteron 148Celeron U3400
Cores / Threads
1 / 1
2 / 2+100%
Boost Clock
2.2 GHz+3043%
0.07 GHz
Base Clock
2.2 GHz+108%
1.06 GHz
L3 Cache
0 kB
2 MB
L2 Cache
1 MB+100%
512 kB
Process
130 nm
32 nm-75%
Architecture
SledgeHammer (2003−2005)
Westmere (2010−2011)
PassMark
548
575+5%
🧠

Memory & Platform

The Opteron 148 uses the 939 socket (PCIe 2.0), while the Celeron U3400 uses BGA1288 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.

FeatureOpteron 148Celeron U3400
Socket
939
BGA1288
PCIe Generation
PCIe 2.0
PCIe 2.0