Athlon II Neo K145 vs Celeron M 390
Aggregate performance score
Athlon II Neo K145 outperforms Celeron M 390 by a small 6% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing Celeron M 390 and Athlon II Neo K145 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 3259 | 3253 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Series | Celeron M | AMD Athlon II Neo |
| Power efficiency | 0.81 | 1.50 |
| Architecture codename | Dothan (2004−2005) | Nile (2010) |
| Release date | no data | 15 December 2010 (14 years ago) |
Detailed specifications
Celeron M 390 and Athlon II Neo K145 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) | 1 (Single-Core) |
| Threads | 1 | 1 |
| Base clock speed | 1.7 GHz | no data |
| Boost clock speed | 1.7 GHz | 1.8 GHz |
| Bus rate | 400 MHz | 2000 MHz |
| L1 cache | no data | 128 KB |
| L2 cache | no data | 1 MB |
| L3 cache | 1 MB L2 KB | no data |
| Chip lithography | 90 nm | 45 nm |
| Maximum core temperature | 100 °C | no data |
| 64 bit support | - | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
| VID voltage range | 1.004V-1.292V | no data |
Compatibility
Information on Celeron M 390 and Athlon II Neo K145 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.
| Socket | PPGA478, H-PBGA479 | S1 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 21 Watt | 12 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron M 390 and Athlon II Neo K145. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | no data | MMX, 3dDNow!, SSE4A, AMD64, Enhanced Virus Protection, Virtualization |
| VirusProtect | - | + |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | - | no data |
| Turbo Boost Technology | - | no data |
| Hyper-Threading Technology | - | no data |
| Idle States | - | no data |
| Demand Based Switching | - | no data |
| PAE | 32 Bit | no data |
| FSB parity | - | no data |
Security technologies
Celeron M 390 and Athlon II Neo K145 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 M 390 and Athlon II Neo K145 are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | - | + |
| VT-x | - | no data |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron M 390 and Athlon II Neo K145. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | no data | DDR3 |
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 0.18 | 0.19 |
| Chip lithography | 90 nm | 45 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 21 Watt | 12 Watt |
Athlon II Neo K145 has a 5.6% higher aggregate performance score, a 100% more advanced lithography process, and 75% lower power consumption.
Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between Celeron M 390 and Athlon II Neo K145.
Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron M 390 and Athlon II Neo K145, 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.
