Celeron M 420 vs Athlon 64 X2 4600+
Aggregate performance score
Athlon 64 X2 4600+ outperforms Celeron M 420 by a whopping 413% 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 | 3227 | 3671 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Desktop processor | Laptop |
| Series | 2x Athlon 64 (Desktop) | Celeron M |
| Designer | AMD | Intel |
| Architecture codename | Windsor (2006−2007) | Yonah (2005−2006) |
| Release date | no data | no data |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $350 | no data |
Detailed specifications
Athlon 64 X2 (Desktop) 4600+ and Celeron M 420 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) | 1 (Single-Core) |
| Threads | 2 | 1 |
| Base clock speed | no data | 1.6 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 2.4 GHz | 1.6 GHz |
| Bus rate | 1000 MHz | 533 MHz |
| L1 cache | 256K | no data |
| L2 cache | 512 KB | no data |
| L3 cache | 0 KB | 1 MB L2 KB |
| Chip lithography | 90 nm | 65 nm |
| Die size | 220 mm2 | no data |
| Maximum core temperature | no data | 100 °C |
| Number of transistors | 154 million | no data |
| 64 bit support | + | - |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
| VID voltage range | no data | 1.0V-1.3V |
Compatibility
Information on Athlon 64 X2 (Desktop) 4600+ and Celeron M 420 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 | no data |
| Socket | 939 | PPGA478 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 1 MB | 27 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Athlon 64 X2 (Desktop) 4600+ and Celeron M 420. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | no data | - |
| Turbo Boost Technology | no data | - |
| Hyper-Threading Technology | no data | - |
| Idle States | no data | - |
| Demand Based Switching | no data | - |
| FSB parity | no data | - |
Security technologies
Athlon 64 X2 (Desktop) 4600+ and Celeron M 420 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 X2 (Desktop) 4600+ and Celeron M 420 are enumerated here.
| VT-x | no data | - |
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.
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. Other than that, Passmark measures multi-core performance.
Cinebench 10 32-bit single-core
Cinebench R10 is an ancient ray tracing benchmark for processors by Maxon, authors of Cinema 4D. Its single core version uses just one CPU thread to render a futuristic looking motorcycle.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 0.41 | 0.08 |
| Physical cores | 2 | 1 |
| Threads | 2 | 1 |
| Chip lithography | 90 nm | 65 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 1 Watt | 27 Watt |
Athlon 64 X2 4600+ has a 412.5% higher aggregate performance score, 100% more physical cores and 100% more threads, and 2600% lower power consumption.
Celeron M 420, on the other hand, has a 38.5% more advanced lithography process.
The AMD Athlon 64 X2 4600+ is our recommended choice as it beats the Intel Celeron M 420 in performance tests.
Note that Athlon 64 X2 4600+ is a desktop processor while Celeron M 420 is a notebook one.
Other comparisons
We've compiled a selection of CPU comparisons, ranging from closely matched processors to other comparisons that may be of interest.
