Athlon 64 X2 3600+ vs Celeron M 353

Primary details

Comparing Celeron M 353 and Athlon 64 X2 3600+ processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the rankingnot ratednot rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopDesktop processor
SeriesCeleron Mno data
Architecture codenameDothan (2004−2005)Manchester (2005−2006)
Release dateno data (2024 years ago)31 May 2005 (19 years ago)

Detailed specifications

Celeron M 353 and Athlon 64 X2 3600+ 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 cores1 (Single-Core)2 (Dual-core)
Threads12
Boost clock speed0.9 GHz2 GHz
Bus rate400 MHzno data
L1 cacheno data128 KB (per core)
L2 cacheno data256 KB (per core)
L3 cacheno data0 KB
Chip lithography90 nm90 nm
Die sizeno data156 mm2
Number of transistorsno data154 million
64 bit support-+
Windows 11 compatibility--

Compatibility

Information on Celeron M 353 and Athlon 64 X2 3600+ 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 configurationno data1
Socketno data939
Power consumption (TDP)5 Watt89 Watt

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron M 353 and Athlon 64 X2 3600+. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesno dataDDR1

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardno dataOn certain motherboards (Chipset feature)

Pros & cons summary


Physical cores 1 2
Threads 1 2
Power consumption (TDP) 5 Watt 89 Watt

Celeron M 353 has 1680% lower power consumption.

Athlon 64 X2 3600+, on the other hand, has 100% more physical cores and 100% more threads.

We couldn't decide between Celeron M 353 and Athlon 64 X2 3600+. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that Celeron M 353 is a notebook processor while Athlon 64 X2 3600+ is a desktop one.


Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron M 353 and Athlon 64 X2 3600+, 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 M 353
Celeron M 353
AMD Athlon 64 X2 3600+
Athlon 64 X2 3600+

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.


3.2 22 votes

Rate Celeron M 353 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.3 78 votes

Rate Athlon 64 X2 3600 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Celeron M 353 or Athlon 64 X2 3600+, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.