Mobile Athlon 64 3000+ vs Celeron 220
Aggregate performance score
Mobile Athlon 64 3000+ outperforms Celeron 220 by a whopping 117% 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 | 3571 | 3357 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Series | no data | Mobile Athlon 64 |
| Power efficiency | 0.27 | 0.31 |
| Designer | Intel | AMD |
| Architecture codename | Conroe (2006−2007) | Oakville (2003−2004) |
| Release date | October 2007 (17 years ago) | August 2003 (22 years ago) |
Detailed specifications
Celeron 220 and Mobile Athlon 64 3000+ 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 | 1 (Single-Core) | 1 (Single-Core) |
| Threads | 1 | 1 |
| Base clock speed | 1.2 GHz | no data |
| Boost clock speed | 1.2 GHz | 2 GHz |
| Bus rate | 533 MHz | 800 MHz |
| L1 cache | 64 KB | 128K |
| L2 cache | 512 KB | 512K |
| L3 cache | 0 KB | no data |
| Chip lithography | 65 nm | no data |
| Die size | 77 mm2 | 193 mm2 |
| Maximum core temperature | 100 °C | no data |
| Number of transistors | 105 million | 106 million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
| VID voltage range | 1V-1.3375V | no data |
Compatibility
Information on Celeron 220 and Mobile Athlon 64 3000+ 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 | PBGA479 | 754 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 19 Watt | 35 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron 220 and Mobile Athlon 64 3000+. 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 |
| Thermal Monitoring | + | - |
| Demand Based Switching | - | no data |
| FSB parity | - | no data |
Security technologies
Celeron 220 and Mobile Athlon 64 3000+ 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 Celeron 220 and Mobile Athlon 64 3000+ are enumerated here.
| VT-d | - | no data |
| VT-x | - | no data |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron 220 and Mobile Athlon 64 3000+. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | no data | DDR1 |
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.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 0.12 | 0.26 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 19 Watt | 35 Watt |
Celeron 220 has 84.2% lower power consumption.
Mobile Athlon 64 3000+, on the other hand, has a 116.7% higher aggregate performance score.
The AMD Mobile Athlon 64 3000+ is our recommended choice as it beats the Intel Celeron 220 in performance tests.
Other comparisons
We've compiled a selection of CPU comparisons, ranging from closely matched processors to other comparisons that may be of interest.
