Athlon II M300 vs Celeron Dual-Core T3500

VS

Aggregate performance score

Celeron Dual-Core T3500
2010
2 cores / 2 threads, 35 Watt
0.80
+90.5%
Athlon II M300
2009
2 cores / 2 threads, 35 Watt
0.42

Celeron Dual-Core T3500 outperforms Athlon II M300 by an impressive 90% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Celeron Dual-Core T3500 and Athlon II M300 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking25992968
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
SeriesIntel Celeron Dual-CoreAMD Athlon II
Power efficiency2.161.14
Architecture codenamePenryn (2008−2011)Caspian (2009)
Release date26 September 2010 (14 years ago)10 September 2009 (15 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$80no data

Detailed specifications

Celeron Dual-Core T3500 and Athlon II M300 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
Boost clock speed2.1 GHz2 GHz
Bus rate800 MHz3200 MHz
L1 cache128 KB128 KB
L2 cache1 MB1 MB
Chip lithography45 nm45 nm
Die size107 mm2no data
Number of transistors410 Millionno data
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--

Compatibility

Information on Celeron Dual-Core T3500 and Athlon II M300 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.

SocketSocket P PGA478Socket S1 (S1g3)
Power consumption (TDP)35 Watt35 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron Dual-Core T3500 and Athlon II M300. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsno dataMMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, Enhanced 3DNow!, NX bit, AMD64, PowerNow!, AMD Virtualization
PowerNow-+

Security technologies

Celeron Dual-Core T3500 and Athlon II M300 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

EDB+no data

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron Dual-Core T3500 and Athlon II M300. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesno dataDDR2

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.

Celeron Dual-Core T3500 0.80
+90.5%
Athlon II M300 0.42

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.

Celeron Dual-Core T3500 1275
+90.3%
Athlon II M300 670

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.

Celeron Dual-Core T3500 2063
+21.4%
Athlon II M300 1700

Cinebench 10 32-bit multi-core

Cinebench Release 10 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R10 using all the processor threads. Possible number of threads is limited by 16 in this version.

Celeron Dual-Core T3500 4098
+23.5%
Athlon II M300 3319

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.

Celeron Dual-Core T3500 1760
+13.4%
Athlon II M300 1552

wPrime 32

wPrime 32M is a math multi-thread processor test, which calculates square roots of first 32 million integer numbers. Its result is measured in seconds, so that the less is benchmark result, the faster the processor.

Celeron Dual-Core T3500 38.5
+1.9%
Athlon II M300 39.24

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.80 0.42
Recency 26 September 2010 10 September 2009

Celeron Dual-Core T3500 has a 90.5% higher aggregate performance score, and an age advantage of 1 year.

The Celeron Dual-Core T3500 is our recommended choice as it beats the Athlon II M300 in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron Dual-Core T3500 and Athlon II M300, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite CPU.


Intel Celeron Dual-Core T3500
Celeron Dual-Core T3500
AMD Athlon II M300
Athlon II M300

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.

Community ratings

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


3.1 104 votes

Rate Celeron Dual-Core T3500 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.6 59 votes

Rate Athlon II M300 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Celeron Dual-Core T3500 or Athlon II M300, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.