Celeron 2.60 vs Athlon 64 TF-20
Aggregate performance score
Athlon 64 TF-20 outperforms Celeron 2.60 by an impressive 88% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Contents
Primary details
Comparing processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 3602 | 3695 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Desktop processor |
| Series | AMD Athlon 64 | no data |
| Power efficiency | 0.25 | 0.05 |
| Designer | AMD | Intel |
| Architecture codename | Sherman (2009) | Northwood (2002−2004) |
| Release date | 1 May 2009 (16 years ago) | June 2003 (22 years ago) |
Detailed specifications
Athlon 64 TF-20 and Celeron 2.60 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 | 1.6 GHz | 2.6 GHz |
| Bus rate | 667 MHz | no data |
| L1 cache | 0.1 MB | 8 KB |
| L2 cache | 512 KB | 128 KB |
| L3 cache | no data | 0 KB |
| Chip lithography | 65 nm | 130 nm |
| Die size | no data | 146 mm2 |
| Maximum core temperature | 95 °C | no data |
| Number of transistors | no data | 55 million |
| 64 bit support | + | - |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
Compatibility
Information on Athlon 64 TF-20 and Celeron 2.60 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 | no data | 1 |
| Socket | S1g1 | 478 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 25 Watt | 73 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Athlon 64 TF-20 and Celeron 2.60. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | MMX, 3DNow!, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, AMD64, Enhanced Virus Protection | no data |
| VirusProtect | + | - |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Athlon 64 TF-20 and Celeron 2.60. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | no data | DDR1, DDR2 |
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 0.15 | 0.08 |
| Chip lithography | 65 nm | 130 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 25 Watt | 73 Watt |
Athlon 64 TF-20 has a 87.5% higher aggregate performance score, a 100% more advanced lithography process, and 192% lower power consumption.
The AMD Athlon 64 TF-20 is our recommended choice as it beats the Intel Celeron 2.60 in performance tests.
Be aware that Athlon 64 TF-20 is a notebook processor while Celeron 2.60 is a desktop one.
Other comparisons
We've compiled a selection of CPU comparisons, ranging from closely matched processors to other comparisons that may be of interest.
