Celeron M 353 vs Athlon II P320
Contents
Primary details
Comparing processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 3177 | not rated |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Series | AMD Athlon II | Celeron M |
| Power efficiency | 0.68 | no data |
| Designer | AMD | Intel |
| Architecture codename | Champlain (2010−2011) | Dothan (2004−2005) |
| Release date | 12 May 2010 (15 years ago) | no data |
Detailed specifications
Athlon II P320 and Celeron M 353 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 |
| Boost clock speed | 2.1 GHz | 0.9 GHz |
| Bus rate | 3200 MHz | 400 MHz |
| L1 cache | 256 KB | no data |
| L2 cache | 1 MB | no data |
| Chip lithography | 45 nm | 90 nm |
| 64 bit support | + | - |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
Compatibility
Information on Athlon II P320 and Celeron M 353 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 | S1g4 | no data |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 25 Watt | 5 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Athlon II P320 and Celeron M 353. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | SSE-3, SSE4A, 3DNow!, MMX, DEP, SVM | no data |
Synthetic benchmark performance
Various benchmark results of the processors in comparison. Overall score is measured in points in 0-100 range, higher is better.
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
| Physical cores | 2 | 1 |
| Threads | 2 | 1 |
| Chip lithography | 45 nm | 90 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 25 Watt | 5 Watt |
Athlon II P320 has 100% more physical cores and 100% more threads, and a 100% more advanced lithography process.
Celeron M 353, on the other hand, has 400% lower power consumption.
We couldn't decide between AMD Athlon II P320 and Intel Celeron M 353. We've got no test results to judge.
Other comparisons
We've compiled a selection of CPU comparisons, ranging from closely matched processors to other comparisons that may be of interest.
