Celeron T3000 vs Athlon X2 QL-64

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

Athlon X2 QL-64
2009
2 cores / 2 threads, 35 Watt
0.39
Celeron T3000
2009
2 cores / 2 threads, 35 Watt
0.39

Primary details

Comparing Athlon X2 QL-64 and Celeron T3000 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking30693061
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Series2x AMD Athlonno data
Power efficiency1.061.06
Architecture codenameLion (2008−2009)no data
Release date1 January 2009 (16 years ago)1 April 2009 (15 years ago)

Detailed specifications

Athlon X2 QL-64 and Celeron T3000 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 cores2 (Dual-core)2 (Dual-core)
Threads22
Base clock speedno data1.8 GHz
Boost clock speed2.1 GHzno data
Bus rate3600 MHzno data
L1 cache256 KBno data
L2 cache1 MBno data
L3 cache0 KB1 MB L2 Cache
Chip lithography65 nm45 nm
Maximum core temperatureno data105 °C
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--
VID voltage rangeno data1V-1.25V

Compatibility

Information on Athlon X2 QL-64 and Celeron T3000 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 configuration1no data
SocketS1PGA478
Power consumption (TDP)35 Watt35 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Athlon X2 QL-64 and Celeron T3000. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsMMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, Enhanced 3DNow!, NX bit, AMD64, PowerNow!, AMD Virtualizationno data
PowerNow+-
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)no data-
Turbo Boost Technologyno data-
Hyper-Threading Technologyno data-
Demand Based Switchingno data-

Security technologies

Athlon X2 QL-64 and Celeron T3000 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 X2 QL-64 and Celeron T3000 are enumerated here.

AMD-V+-
VT-xno 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.


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark performance rating.

Athlon X2 QL-64 0.39
Celeron T3000 0.39

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 X2 QL-64 622
Celeron T3000 630
+1.3%

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 X2 QL-64 201
Celeron T3000 225
+11.9%

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 X2 QL-64 384
Celeron T3000 384

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Recency 1 January 2009 1 April 2009
Chip lithography 65 nm 45 nm

Celeron T3000 has an age advantage of 3 months, and a 44.4% more advanced lithography process.

Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between Athlon X2 QL-64 and Celeron T3000.

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 X2 QL-64
Athlon X2 QL-64
Intel Celeron T3000
Celeron T3000

Other comparisons

We've compiled a selection of CPU comparisons, ranging from closely matched processors to other comparisons that may be of interest.

Community ratings

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


3.7 37 votes

Rate Athlon X2 QL-64 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
5 2 votes

Rate Celeron T3000 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can give us your opinion about processors Athlon X2 QL-64 and Celeron T3000, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report bugs or inaccuracies on the site.