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 ranking | not rated | not rated |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Desktop processor |
| Series | Celeron M | no data |
| Architecture codename | Dothan (2004−2005) | Manchester (2005−2006) |
| Release date | no data | 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 cores | 1 (Single-Core) | 2 (Dual-core) |
| Threads | 1 | 2 |
| Boost clock speed | 0.9 GHz | 2 GHz |
| Bus rate | 400 MHz | no data |
| L1 cache | no data | 128 KB (per core) |
| L2 cache | no data | 256 KB (per core) |
| L3 cache | no data | 0 KB |
| Chip lithography | 90 nm | 90 nm |
| Die size | no data | 156 mm2 |
| Number of transistors | no data | 154 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 configuration | no data | 1 |
| Socket | no data | 939 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 5 Watt | 89 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 types | no data | DDR1 |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | no data | On 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.
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.
