Opteron 254 vs Celeron 857
Opteron 254
Celeron 857
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 254 is positioned at rank 658 and the Celeron 857 is on rank 1201, so the Opteron 254 offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar Opteron 254
Performance Per Dollar Celeron 857
Performance Comparison
About PassMark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
| Insight | Opteron 254 | Celeron 857 |
|---|---|---|
| Gaming | ✅ Superior gaming performance | ❌ Lower gaming performance |
| Workstation | ❌ Weaker in multi-core tasks | ✅ Better multi-core power |
| Price | ✅ More affordable ($0) | ⚠️ Higher cost ($10) |
| Longevity | 🛑 Legacy (Troy (2005) / 90 nm) | 🛑 Legacy (Sandy Bridge (2011−2013) / 32 nm) |
💎 Value Proposition
| Insight | Opteron 254 | Celeron 857 |
|---|---|---|
| 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 Opteron 254 and Celeron 857
Opteron 254
The Opteron 254 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 2015-01-01. It is based on the Troy (2005) architecture. It features 1 cores and 1 threads. Max frequency: 2.8 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 1 MB. Built on 90 nm process technology. Socket: 940. Thermal design power (TDP): 92 Watt. Passmark benchmark score: 690 points. Launch price was $800.
Celeron 857
The Celeron 857 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 1 July 2011 (14 years ago). It is based on the Sandy Bridge (2011−2013) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 1.2 GHz, with boost up to 1.2 GHz. L3 cache: 2 MB (total). L2 cache: 256K (per core). Built on 32 nm process technology. Socket: BGA1023. Thermal design power (TDP): 17 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 705 points. Launch price was $134.
Processing Power
The Opteron 254 packs 1 cores / 1 threads, while the Celeron 857 offers 2 cores / 2 threads — the Celeron 857 has 1 more core. Boost clocks reach 2.8 GHz on the Opteron 254 versus 1.2 GHz on the Celeron 857 — a 80% clock advantage for the Opteron 254. The Opteron 254 uses the Troy (2005) architecture (90 nm), while the Celeron 857 uses Sandy Bridge (2011−2013) (32 nm). In PassMark, the Opteron 254 scores 690 against the Celeron 857's 705 — a 2.2% lead for the Celeron 857. L3 cache: 0 kB on the Opteron 254 vs 2 MB (total) on the Celeron 857.
| Feature | Opteron 254 | Celeron 857 |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 1 / 1 | 2 / 2+100% |
| Boost Clock | 2.8 GHz+133% | 1.2 GHz |
| Base Clock | — | 1.2 GHz |
| L3 Cache | 0 kB | 2 MB (total) |
| L2 Cache | 1 MB+300% | 256K (per core) |
| Process | 90 nm | 32 nm-64% |
| Architecture | Troy (2005) | Sandy Bridge (2011−2013) |
| PassMark | 690 | 705+2% |
Memory & Platform
The Opteron 254 uses the 940 socket (PCIe 2.0), while the Celeron 857 uses BGA1023 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.
| Feature | Opteron 254 | Celeron 857 |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | 940 | BGA1023 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 2.0 | PCIe 2.0 |
| Max RAM Speed | — | DDR3-1333 |
| Max RAM Capacity | — | 16 GB |
| RAM Channels | — | 2 |
| ECC Support | — | ❌ |
| PCIe Lanes | — | 16 |
Advanced Features
Virtualization: not specified (Opteron 254) / VT-x (Celeron 857). The Celeron 857 includes integrated graphics (HD Graphics (Sandy Bridge)), while the Opteron 254 requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Celeron 857 targets Budget. Direct competitor: Celeron 857 rivals Pentium 967.
| Feature | Opteron 254 | Celeron 857 |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | — | Yes |
| IGPU Model | — | HD Graphics (Sandy Bridge) |
| Unlocked | — | No |
| AVX-512 | — | No |
| Virtualization | — | VT-x |
| 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 Opteron 254 and Celeron 857
