Athlon 64 X2 6000+ vs Celeron Dual-Core T1600
Aggregate performance score
Celeron Dual-Core T1600 outperforms Athlon 64 X2 6000+ by a minimal 2% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing Celeron Dual-Core T1600 and Athlon 64 X2 6000+ processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 2791 | 2800 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Desktop processor |
| Series | Intel Celeron Dual-Core | no data |
| Power efficiency | 1.62 | 0.45 |
| Architecture codename | Merom (2006−2008) | Windsor (2006−2007) |
| Release date | 1 May 2008 (16 years ago) | August 2007 (17 years ago) |
Detailed specifications
Celeron Dual-Core T1600 and Athlon 64 X2 6000+ 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) | 2 (Dual-core) |
| Threads | 2 | 2 |
| Boost clock speed | 1.66 GHz | 3.1 GHz |
| Bus rate | 667 MHz | no data |
| L1 cache | no data | 256 KB |
| L2 cache | 1 MB | 512K |
| L3 cache | no data | 0 KB |
| Chip lithography | 65 nm | 90 nm |
| Die size | 143 mm2 | 220 mm2 |
| Maximum core temperature | 100 °C | no data |
| Number of transistors | 291 Million | 227 million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
Compatibility
Information on Celeron Dual-Core T1600 and Athlon 64 X2 6000+ 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 | AM2 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 35 Watt | 125 Watt |
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.
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.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 0.60 | 0.59 |
| Chip lithography | 65 nm | 90 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 35 Watt | 125 Watt |
Celeron Dual-Core T1600 has a 1.7% higher aggregate performance score, a 38.5% more advanced lithography process, and 257.1% lower power consumption.
Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between Celeron Dual-Core T1600 and Athlon 64 X2 6000+.
Be aware that Celeron Dual-Core T1600 is a notebook processor while Athlon 64 X2 6000+ is a desktop one.
Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron Dual-Core T1600 and Athlon 64 X2 6000+, 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.
