Intel Celeron 2.40 vs AMD Athlon 64 2000+

#ad
Buy
VS

General info

Comparing Athlon 64 2000+ and Celeron 2.40 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in performance rankingnot ratednot rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentDesktop processorDesktop processor
Architecture codenameLima (2008−2009)Northwood (2001−2004)
Release dateJune 2008 (15 years old)March 2003 (21 year old)
Current price$50 $250

Technical specs

Athlon 64 2000+ and Celeron 2.40 basic parameters such as number of cores, number of threads, base frequency and turbo boost clock, lithography, cache size and multiplier lock state. These parameters indirectly say of CPU speed, though for more precise assessment you have to consider their test results.

Physical cores1 (Single-Core)1 (Single-Core)
Threads11
Boost clock speed1 GHz2.4 GHz
L1 cache128 KB8 KB
L2 cache512 KB128 KB
L3 cache0 KB0 KB
Chip lithography65 nm130 nm
Die size77 mm2146 mm2
Number of transistors122 million55 million
64 bit support+-
Windows 11 compatibility--
Unlocked multiplierNoNo

Compatibility

Information on Athlon 64 2000+ and Celeron 2.40 compatibility with other computer components: motherboard (look for socket type), power supply unit (look for power consumption) etc. Useful when planning a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. Note that power consumption of some processors can well exceed their nominal TDP, even without overclocking. Some can even double their declared thermals given that the motherboard allows to tune the CPU power parameters.

Number of CPUs in a configuration11
SocketAM2478
Power consumption (TDP)8 Watt73 Watt

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Athlon 64 2000+ and Celeron 2.40. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesno dataDDR1, DDR2

Synthetic benchmark performance

Various benchmark results of the processors in comparison. Overall score is measured in points in 0-100 range, higher is better.


Passmark

Passmark CPU Mark is a widespread benchmark, consisting of 8 different types of workload, including integer and floating point math, extended instructions, compression, encryption and physics calculation. There is also one separate single-threaded scenario measuring single-core performance.

Benchmark coverage: 68%

Athlon 64 2000+ 154
+7.7%
Celeron 2.40 143

Athlon 64 2000+ outperforms Celeron 2.40 by 8% in Passmark.

Advantages and disadvantages


Chip lithography 65 nm 130 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 8 Watt 73 Watt

We couldn't decide between Athlon 64 2000+ and Celeron 2.40. We've got no test results to judge.


Should you still have questions on choice between Athlon 64 2000+ and Celeron 2.40, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

User ratings

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite CPU.


AMD Athlon 64 2000+
Athlon 64 2000+
Intel Celeron 2.40
Celeron 2.40

Similar processor comparisons

We picked several similar comparisons of processors in the same market segment and performance relatively close to those reviewed on this page.

User ratings: view and submit

Here you can see how users rate the processors, as well as rate them yourself.


2.1 11 votes

Rate AMD Athlon 64 2000 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.3 31 vote

Rate Intel Celeron 2.40 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions and comments

Here you can ask a question about Athlon 64 2000+ or Celeron 2.40, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.