Athlon 64 TF-20 vs Celeron 2970M
Aggregate performance score
Celeron 2970M outperforms Athlon 64 TF-20 by a whopping 488% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing Celeron 2970M and Athlon 64 TF-20 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 2504 | 3280 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Series | Intel Celeron | AMD Athlon 64 |
| Power efficiency | 2.40 | 0.61 |
| Architecture codename | Haswell (2013−2015) | Sherman (2009) |
| Release date | 14 April 2014 (10 years ago) | 1 May 2009 (15 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $75 | no data |
Detailed specifications
Celeron 2970M and Athlon 64 TF-20 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 | 2.2 GHz | no data |
| Boost clock speed | 2.2 GHz | 1.6 GHz |
| Bus rate | 5 GT/s | 667 MHz |
| L1 cache | 128 KB | 0.1 MB |
| L2 cache | 512 KB | 512 KB |
| L3 cache | 2 MB | no data |
| Chip lithography | 22 nm | 65 nm |
| Die size | 130 mm2 | no data |
| Maximum core temperature | 100 °C | 95 °C |
| Number of transistors | 960 Million | no data |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
Compatibility
Information on Celeron 2970M and Athlon 64 TF-20 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 | FCPGA946 | S1g1 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 37 Watt | 25 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron 2970M and Athlon 64 TF-20. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | Intel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2 | MMX, 3DNow!, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, AMD64, Enhanced Virus Protection |
| VirusProtect | - | + |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | + | no data |
| Turbo Boost Technology | - | no data |
| Hyper-Threading Technology | - | no data |
| Thermal Monitoring | + | - |
Security technologies
Celeron 2970M and Athlon 64 TF-20 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| TXT | - | no data |
| EDB | + | no data |
| Secure Key | + | no data |
| Anti-Theft | - | no data |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Celeron 2970M and Athlon 64 TF-20 are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | + | - |
| VT-d | - | no data |
| VT-x | + | no data |
| EPT | + | no data |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron 2970M and Athlon 64 TF-20. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR3 | no data |
| Maximum memory size | 32 GB | no data |
| Max memory channels | 2 | no data |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | 25.6 GB/s | no data |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | Intel® HD Graphics for 4th Generation Intel® Processors | no data |
| Quick Sync Video | + | - |
| Graphics max frequency | 1.1 GHz | no data |
Graphics interfaces
Available interfaces and connections of Celeron 2970M and Athlon 64 TF-20 integrated GPUs.
| Number of displays supported | 3 | no data |
| eDP | + | no data |
| DisplayPort | + | - |
| HDMI | + | - |
| VGA | + | no data |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Celeron 2970M and Athlon 64 TF-20.
| PCIe version | 2.0 | no data |
| PCI Express lanes | 16 | 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.
Combined synthetic benchmark score
This is our combined benchmark performance rating. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.
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.
3DMark06 CPU
3DMark06 is a discontinued DirectX 9 benchmark suite from Futuremark. Its CPU part contains two scenarios, one dedicated to artificial intelligence pathfinding, another to game physics using PhysX package.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 0.94 | 0.16 |
| Recency | 14 April 2014 | 1 May 2009 |
| Physical cores | 2 | 1 |
| Threads | 2 | 1 |
| Chip lithography | 22 nm | 65 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 37 Watt | 25 Watt |
Celeron 2970M has a 487.5% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 4 years, 100% more physical cores and 100% more threads, and a 195.5% more advanced lithography process.
Athlon 64 TF-20, on the other hand, has 48% lower power consumption.
The Celeron 2970M is our recommended choice as it beats the Athlon 64 TF-20 in performance tests.
Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron 2970M and Athlon 64 TF-20, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
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.
