Celeron 220 vs Athlon 64 TF-20
Aggregate performance score
Athlon 64 TF-20 outperforms Celeron 220 by a significant 23% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing Athlon 64 TF-20 and Celeron 220 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 3300 | 3343 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Series | AMD Athlon 64 | no data |
| Power efficiency | 0.61 | 0.65 |
| Architecture codename | Sherman (2009) | Conroe (2006−2007) |
| Release date | 1 May 2009 (15 years ago) | October 2007 (17 years ago) |
Detailed specifications
Athlon 64 TF-20 and Celeron 220 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 | 1.2 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1.6 GHz | 1.2 GHz |
| Bus rate | 667 MHz | 533 MHz |
| L1 cache | 0.1 MB | 64 KB |
| L2 cache | 512 KB | 512 KB |
| L3 cache | no data | 0 KB |
| Chip lithography | 65 nm | 65 nm |
| Die size | no data | 77 mm2 |
| Maximum core temperature | 95 °C | 100 °C |
| Number of transistors | no data | 105 million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
| VID voltage range | no data | 1V-1.3375V |
Compatibility
Information on Athlon 64 TF-20 and Celeron 220 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 | PBGA479 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 25 Watt | 19 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Athlon 64 TF-20 and Celeron 220. 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 | + | - |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | no data | - |
| Turbo Boost Technology | no data | - |
| Hyper-Threading Technology | no data | - |
| Idle States | no data | + |
| Thermal Monitoring | - | + |
| Demand Based Switching | no data | - |
| FSB parity | no data | - |
Security technologies
Athlon 64 TF-20 and Celeron 220 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 TF-20 and Celeron 220 are enumerated here.
| VT-d | no data | - |
| VT-x | no data | - |
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 0.16 | 0.13 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 25 Watt | 19 Watt |
Athlon 64 TF-20 has a 23.1% higher aggregate performance score.
Celeron 220, on the other hand, has 31.6% lower power consumption.
The Athlon 64 TF-20 is our recommended choice as it beats the Celeron 220 in performance tests.
Should you still have questions on choice between Athlon 64 TF-20 and Celeron 220, 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.
