Celeron G5905 vs Athlon 64 X2 3600+
Aggregate performance score
Celeron G5905 outperforms Athlon 64 X2 3600+ by a whopping 340% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing Athlon 64 X2 3600+ and Celeron G5905 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 3009 | 2033 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Desktop processor | Desktop processor |
| Power efficiency | 0.43 | 2.87 |
| Architecture codename | Manchester (2005−2006) | no data |
| Release date | 31 May 2005 (19 years ago) | 1 July 2020 (4 years ago) |
Detailed specifications
Athlon 64 X2 3600+ and Celeron G5905 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 | 2 (Dual-core) | 2 (Dual-core) |
| Threads | 2 | 2 |
| Base clock speed | no data | 3.5 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 2 GHz | no data |
| Bus rate | no data | 8 GT/s |
| L1 cache | 128 KB (per core) | no data |
| L2 cache | 256 KB (per core) | no data |
| L3 cache | 0 KB | 4 MB Intel® Smart Cache |
| Chip lithography | 90 nm | 14 nm |
| Die size | 156 mm2 | no data |
| Maximum core temperature | no data | 100 °C |
| Number of transistors | 154 million | no data |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | + |
Compatibility
Information on Athlon 64 X2 3600+ and Celeron G5905 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 | 939 | FCLGA1200 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 89 Watt | 58 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Athlon 64 X2 3600+ and Celeron G5905. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | no data | Intel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2 |
| AES-NI | - | + |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | no data | + |
| Turbo Boost Technology | no data | - |
| Hyper-Threading Technology | no data | - |
| Idle States | no data | + |
| Thermal Monitoring | - | + |
| Turbo Boost Max 3.0 | no data | - |
Security technologies
Athlon 64 X2 3600+ and Celeron G5905 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| TXT | no data | - |
| EDB | no data | + |
| Secure Key | no data | + |
| Identity Protection | - | + |
| SGX | no data | Yes with Intel® ME |
| OS Guard | no data | + |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Athlon 64 X2 3600+ and Celeron G5905 are enumerated here.
| VT-d | no data | + |
| VT-x | no data | + |
| EPT | no data | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Athlon 64 X2 3600+ and Celeron G5905. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR1 | DDR4-2666 |
| Maximum memory size | no data | 128 GB |
| Max memory channels | no data | 2 |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | no data | 41.6 GB/s |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | On certain motherboards (Chipset feature) | Intel UHD Graphics 610 |
| Max video memory | no data | 64 GB |
| Quick Sync Video | - | + |
| Clear Video | no data | + |
| Clear Video HD | no data | + |
| Graphics max frequency | no data | 1.05 GHz |
| InTru 3D | no data | + |
Graphics interfaces
Available interfaces and connections of Athlon 64 X2 3600+ and Celeron G5905 integrated GPUs.
| Number of displays supported | no data | 3 |
Graphics image quality
Maximum display resolutions supported by Athlon 64 X2 3600+ and Celeron G5905 integrated GPUs, including resolutions over different interfaces.
| 4K resolution support | no data | + |
| Max resolution over HDMI 1.4 | no data | 4096x2160@30Hz |
| Max resolution over eDP | no data | 4096x2304@60Hz |
| Max resolution over DisplayPort | no data | 4096x2304@60Hz |
Graphics API support
APIs supported by Athlon 64 X2 3600+ and Celeron G5905 integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.
| DirectX | no data | 12 |
| OpenGL | no data | 4.5 |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Athlon 64 X2 3600+ and Celeron G5905.
| PCIe version | no data | 3.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | no data | 16 |
Synthetic benchmark performance
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. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.
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.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 0.40 | 1.76 |
| Recency | 31 May 2005 | 1 July 2020 |
| Chip lithography | 90 nm | 14 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 89 Watt | 58 Watt |
Celeron G5905 has a 340% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 15 years, a 542.9% more advanced lithography process, and 53.4% lower power consumption.
The Celeron G5905 is our recommended choice as it beats the Athlon 64 X2 3600+ in performance tests.
Should you still have questions on choice between Athlon 64 X2 3600+ and Celeron G5905, 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.
