CPU
GPU
Opteron 254
Celeron T1600
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 T1600 is on rank 1173, 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 T1600
Performance Comparison
About PassMark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
| Insight | Opteron 254 | Celeron T1600 |
|---|---|---|
| Gaming | ✅ Superior gaming performance | ❌ Lower gaming performance |
| Workstation | ❌ Weaker in multi-core tasks | ✅ Better multi-core power |
| Price | ✅ More affordable ($0) | ⚠️ Higher cost ($15) |
| Longevity | 🛑 Legacy (Troy (2005) / 90 nm) | 🛑 Legacy (Legacy / 65 nm) |
💎 Value Proposition
| Insight | Opteron 254 | Celeron T1600 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ❌ Lower cost efficiency | ❌ Lower cost efficiency |
| Upfront Cost | ✅ More affordable ($0) | ⚠️ Higher cost ($15) |
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 T1600
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 T1600
The Celeron T1600 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 2007-01-01. Base frequency: 1.66 GHz. L3 cache: 1 MB L2 Cache. Built on 65 nm process technology. Socket: PGA478. Thermal design power (TDP): 35 Watt. Passmark benchmark score: 715 points. Launch price was $69.
Processing Power
The Opteron 254 is built on the Troy (2005) architecture. In PassMark, the Opteron 254 scores 690 against the Celeron T1600's 715 — a 3.6% lead for the Celeron T1600. L3 cache: 0 kB on the Opteron 254 vs 1 MB L2 Cache on the Celeron T1600.
| Feature | Opteron 254 | Celeron T1600 |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 1 / 1 | — |
| Boost Clock | 2.8 GHz | — |
| Base Clock | — | 1.66 GHz |
| L3 Cache | 0 kB | 1 MB L2 Cache |
| L2 Cache | 1 MB | — |
| Process | 90 nm | 65 nm-28% |
| Architecture | Troy (2005) | — |
| PassMark | 690 | 715+4% |
Memory & Platform
The Opteron 254 uses the 940 socket (PCIe 2.0), while the Celeron T1600 uses PGA478 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.
| Feature | Opteron 254 | Celeron T1600 |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | 940 | PGA478 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 2.0 | PCIe 2.0 |
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 T1600
