Celeron G460 vs Athlon II X3 435

VS

Primary details

Comparing Athlon II X3 435 and Celeron G460 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking2440not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.04no data
Market segmentDesktop processorDesktop processor
Power efficiency1.03no data
Architecture codenameRana (2009−2011)Sandy Bridge (2011−2013)
Release date9 October 2009 (15 years ago)12 December 2011 (12 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$160$65

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Detailed specifications

Athlon II X3 435 and Celeron G460 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 cores3 (Tri-Core)1 (Single-Core)
Threads32
Base clock speed2.9 GHz1.8 GHz
Boost clock speed2.9 GHz1.8 GHz
Bus rateno data5 GT/s
L1 cache128 KB (per core)64 KB
L2 cache512 KB (per core)256 KB
L3 cache0 KB1.5 MB
Chip lithography45 nm32 nm
Die size169 mm2131 mm2
Maximum core temperatureno data66 °C
Number of transistors300 million504 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--

Compatibility

Information on Athlon II X3 435 and Celeron G460 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 configuration11
SocketAM3FCLGA1155
Power consumption (TDP)95 Watt35 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Athlon II X3 435 and Celeron G460. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsno dataIntel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)no data+
Turbo Boost Technologyno data-
Hyper-Threading Technologyno data+
Idle Statesno data+
Thermal Monitoring-+
Flex Memory Accessno data+
FDIno data+
Fast Memory Accessno data+

Security technologies

Athlon II X3 435 and Celeron G460 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXTno data-
EDBno data+

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Athlon II X3 435 and Celeron G460 are enumerated here.

VT-dno data-
VT-xno data+
EPTno data+

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Athlon II X3 435 and Celeron G460. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3DDR3
Maximum memory sizeno data32 GB
Max memory channelsno data2
Maximum memory bandwidthno data17 GB/s

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardOn certain motherboards (Chipset feature)Intel® HD Graphics for 2nd Generation Intel® Processors
Graphics max frequencyno data1 GHz

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of Athlon II X3 435 and Celeron G460 integrated GPUs.

Number of displays supportedno data2

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Athlon II X3 435 and Celeron G460.

PCIe version2.02.0

Synthetic benchmark performance

Various benchmark results of the processors in comparison. Overall score is measured in points in 0-100 range, higher is better.



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.

Athlon II X3 435 1630
+248%
Celeron G460 469

GeekBench 5 Single-Core

GeekBench 5 Single-Core is a cross-platform application developed in the form of CPU tests that independently recreate certain real-world tasks with which to accurately measure performance. This version uses only a single CPU core.

Athlon II X3 435 325
+14%
Celeron G460 285

GeekBench 5 Multi-Core

GeekBench 5 Multi-Core is a cross-platform application developed in the form of CPU tests that independently recreate certain real-world tasks with which to accurately measure performance. This version uses all available CPU cores.

Athlon II X3 435 834
+117%
Celeron G460 385

Pros & cons summary


Recency 9 October 2009 12 December 2011
Physical cores 3 1
Threads 3 2
Chip lithography 45 nm 32 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 95 Watt 35 Watt

Athlon II X3 435 has 200% more physical cores and 50% more threads.

Celeron G460, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 2 years, a 40.6% more advanced lithography process, and 171.4% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between Athlon II X3 435 and Celeron G460. We've got no test results to judge.


Should you still have questions on choice between Athlon II X3 435 and Celeron G460, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite CPU.


AMD Athlon II X3 435
Athlon II X3 435
Intel Celeron G460
Celeron G460

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.

Community ratings

Here you can see how users rate the processors, as well as rate them yourself.


3.9 154 votes

Rate Athlon II X3 435 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.3 28 votes

Rate Celeron G460 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Athlon II X3 435 or Celeron G460, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.