Celeron 2.8 GHz vs Athlon 64 2000+
Contents
Primary details
Comparing processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 3672 | not rated |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Desktop processor | Laptop |
| Power efficiency | 1.21 | no data |
| Designer | AMD | Intel |
| Architecture codename | Lima (2008−2009) | Northwood (2002−2004) |
| Release date | June 2008 (17 years ago) | no data |
Detailed specifications
Athlon 64 2000+ and Celeron 2.8 GHz 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 cores | 1 (Single-Core) | 1 (Single-Core) |
| Threads | 1 | 1 |
| Boost clock speed | 1 GHz | 2.8 GHz |
| Bus rate | no data | 400 MHz |
| L1 cache | 128 KB | no data |
| L2 cache | 512 KB | no data |
| L3 cache | 0 KB | no data |
| Chip lithography | 65 nm | 130 nm |
| Die size | 77 mm2 | no data |
| Number of transistors | 122 million | no data |
| 64 bit support | + | - |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
Compatibility
Information on Athlon 64 2000+ and Celeron 2.8 GHz 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 configuration | 1 | no data |
| Socket | AM2 | no data |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 8 Watt | 128 KB |
Pros & cons summary
| Chip lithography | 65 nm | 130 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 8 Watt | 128 Watt |
Athlon 64 2000+ has a 100% more advanced lithography process, and 1500% lower power consumption.
We couldn't decide between AMD Athlon 64 2000+ and Intel Celeron 2.8 GHz. We've got no test results to judge.
Note that Athlon 64 2000+ is a desktop processor while Celeron 2.8 GHz is a notebook one.
Other comparisons
We've compiled a selection of CPU comparisons, ranging from closely matched processors to other comparisons that may be of interest.
