Celeron 430 vs Athlon 64 3300+
General info
Comparing Athlon 64 3300+ and Celeron 430 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in performance ranking | not rated | not rated |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Desktop processor | Desktop processor |
| Architecture codename | NewCastle (2004) | Conroe-L (2007−2008) |
| Release date | April 2004 (20 years old) | June 2007 (16 years old) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | no data | $50 |
| Current price | $54 | $9.95 (0.2x MSRP) |
Technical specs
Athlon 64 3300+ and Celeron 430 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 |
| Base clock speed | no data | 1.8 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 2.4 GHz | 1.8 GHz |
| L1 cache | 128 KB | 64 KB |
| L2 cache | 256 KB | 512 KB |
| L3 cache | 0 KB | 0 KB |
| Chip lithography | 130 nm | 65 nm |
| Die size | 144 mm2 | 77 mm2 |
| Maximum core temperature | no data | 60 °C |
| Number of transistors | 105 million | 105 million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
| Unlocked multiplier | No | No |
| VID voltage range | no data | 1V-1.3375V |
Compatibility
Information on Athlon 64 3300+ and Celeron 430 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 | 1 |
| Socket | 754 | LGA775 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 89 Watt | 35 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Athlon 64 3300+ and Celeron 430. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| AES-NI | no data | - |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | no data | - |
| Turbo Boost Technology | no data | - |
| Hyper-Threading Technology | no data | - |
| Idle States | no data | - |
| Thermal Monitoring | no data | + |
| Demand Based Switching | no data | - |
| FSB parity | no data | - |
| Status | no data | Discontinued |
Security technologies
Athlon 64 3300+ and Celeron 430 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| TXT | no data | - |
| EDB | no data | + |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Athlon 64 3300+ and Celeron 430 are enumerated here.
| VT-d | no data | - |
| VT-x | no data | - |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Athlon 64 3300+ and Celeron 430. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | no data | DDR1, DDR2, DDR3 |
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 3300+ outperforms Celeron 430 by 34% in Passmark.
Advantages and disadvantages
| Chip lithography | 130 nm | 65 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 89 Watt | 35 Watt |
We couldn't decide between Athlon 64 3300+ and Celeron 430. We've got no test results to judge.
Should you still have questions on choice between Athlon 64 3300+ and Celeron 430, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
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.
