Athlon XP 2500+ vs Celeron 570
Aggregate performance score
Celeron 570 outperforms Athlon XP 2500+ by an impressive 54% 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 | 3521 | 3648 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Desktop processor |
| Power efficiency | 0.27 | 0.08 |
| Designer | Intel | AMD |
| Architecture codename | no data | Barton (2001−2004) |
| Release date | 1 April 2008 (18 years ago) | February 2003 (23 years ago) |
Detailed specifications
Basic parameters of Celeron 570 and Athlon XP 2500+: 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 | no data | 1 (Single-Core) |
| Threads | no data | 1 |
| Base clock speed | 2.26 GHz | no data |
| Boost clock speed | no data | 1.83 GHz |
| L1 cache | no data | 128 KB |
| L2 cache | no data | 512 KB |
| L3 cache | 1 MB L2 Cache | 0 KB |
| Chip lithography | 65 nm | 130 nm |
| Die size | no data | 101 mm2 |
| Number of transistors | no data | 63 million |
| 64 bit support | + | - |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
Compatibility
Information on Celeron 570 and Athlon XP 2500+ 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 | no data | 1 |
| Socket | PPGA478 | A |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 31 Watt | 68 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron 570 and Athlon XP 2500+. 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 |
| Demand Based Switching | - | no data |
| FSB parity | - | no data |
Security technologies
Celeron 570 and Athlon XP 2500+ 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 570 and Athlon XP 2500+ are enumerated here.
| VT-x | - | no data |
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 | 0.20 | 0.13 |
| Chip lithography | 65 nm | 130 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 31 Watt | 68 Watt |
Celeron 570 has a 54% higher aggregate performance score, a 100% more advanced lithography process, and 119% lower power consumption.
The Intel Celeron 570 is our recommended choice as it beats the AMD Athlon XP 2500+ in performance tests.
Be aware that Celeron 570 is a notebook processor while Athlon XP 2500+ is a desktop one.
Other comparisons
We've compiled a selection of CPU comparisons, ranging from closely matched processors to other comparisons that may be of interest.
