Turion 64 MT-32 vs Celeron 925
Turion 64 MT-32
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 Turion 64 MT-32 is positioned at rank 942 and the Celeron 925 is on rank 1202, so the Turion 64 MT-32 offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar Turion 64 MT-32
Performance Per Dollar Celeron 925
Performance Comparison
About PassMark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
| Insight | Turion 64 MT-32 | 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 (Lancaster (2005−2006) / 90 nm) | 🛑 Legacy (Legacy / 45 nm) |
💎 Value Proposition
| Insight | Turion 64 MT-32 | 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 Turion 64 MT-32 and Celeron 925
Turion 64 MT-32
The Turion 64 MT-32 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 2007-01-01. It is based on the Lancaster (2005−2006) architecture. It features 1 cores and 1 threads. Max frequency: 1.79 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 512 kB. Built on 90 nm process technology. Socket: 754. Thermal design power (TDP): 512 kB. 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 Turion 64 MT-32 is built on the Lancaster (2005−2006) architecture. In PassMark, the Turion 64 MT-32 scores 505 against the Celeron 925's 525 — a 3.9% lead for the Celeron 925. L3 cache: 0 kB on the Turion 64 MT-32 vs 1 MB L2 Cache on the Celeron 925.
| Feature | Turion 64 MT-32 | Celeron 925 |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 1 / 1 | — |
| Boost Clock | 1.79 GHz | — |
| Base Clock | — | 2.3 GHz |
| L3 Cache | 0 kB | 1 MB L2 Cache |
| L2 Cache | 512 kB | — |
| Process | 90 nm | 45 nm-50% |
| Architecture | Lancaster (2005−2006) | — |
| PassMark | 505 | 525+4% |
Advanced Features
Virtualization: not specified (Turion 64 MT-32) / No (Celeron 925). Primary use case: Celeron 925 targets Budget. Direct competitor: Celeron 925 rivals Pentium 4 2.80.
| Feature | Turion 64 MT-32 | Celeron 925 |
|---|---|---|
| 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 Turion 64 MT-32 and Celeron 925
