Celeron Dual-Core T1600 vs Athlon 64 TF-20
Aggregate performance score
Celeron Dual-Core T1600 outperforms Athlon 64 TF-20 by a whopping 260% 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 | 3571 | 3090 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Series | AMD Athlon 64 | Intel Celeron Dual-Core |
| Designer | AMD | Intel |
| Architecture codename | Sherman (2009) | Merom (2006−2008) |
| Release date | 1 May 2009 (16 years ago) | 1 May 2008 (17 years ago) |
Detailed specifications
Athlon 64 TF-20 and Celeron Dual-Core T1600 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) | 2 (Dual-core) |
| Threads | 1 | 2 |
| Boost clock speed | 1.6 GHz | 1.66 GHz |
| Bus rate | 667 MHz | 667 MHz |
| L1 cache | 0.1 MB | no data |
| L2 cache | 512 KB | 1 MB |
| Chip lithography | 65 nm | 65 nm |
| Die size | no data | 143 mm2 |
| Maximum core temperature | 95 °C | 100 °C |
| Number of transistors | no data | 291 Million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
Compatibility
Information on Athlon 64 TF-20 and Celeron Dual-Core T1600 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.
| Socket | S1g1 | PPGA478 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 512 KB | 1 MB |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Athlon 64 TF-20 and Celeron Dual-Core T1600. 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 | + | - |
Synthetic benchmarks
Various benchmark results of the processors in comparison. Overall score is measured in points in 0-100 range, higher is better.
Combined synthetic benchmark score
This is our combined benchmark performance rating.
3DMark06 CPU
3DMark06 is a discontinued DirectX 9 benchmark suite from Futuremark. Its CPU part contains two scenarios, one dedicated to artificial intelligence pathfinding, another to game physics using PhysX package.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 0.15 | 0.54 |
| Recency | 1 May 2009 | 1 May 2008 |
| Physical cores | 1 | 2 |
| Threads | 1 | 2 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 512 Watt | 1 Watt |
Athlon 64 TF-20 has an age advantage of 1 year.
Celeron Dual-Core T1600, on the other hand, has a 260% higher aggregate performance score, 100% more physical cores and 100% more threads, and 51100% lower power consumption.
The Intel Celeron Dual-Core T1600 is our recommended choice as it beats the AMD Athlon 64 TF-20 in performance tests.
Other comparisons
We've compiled a selection of CPU comparisons, ranging from closely matched processors to other comparisons that may be of interest.
