Athlon 64 X2 4000+ vs Celeron M 560

Primary details

Comparing Celeron M 560 and Athlon 64 X2 4000+ 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
SeriesIntel Celeron Mno data
Architecture codenameMerom (2006−2008)Windsor (2006−2007)
Release date1 May 2008 (16 years ago)May 2006 (18 years ago)

Detailed specifications

Celeron M 560 and Athlon 64 X2 4000+ 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 speed2.13 GHz2 GHz
Bus rate533 MHzno data
L1 cache64 KB256 KB
L2 cache1 MB512K
L3 cacheno data0 KB
Chip lithography65 nm90 nm
Die size143 mm2220 mm2
Maximum core temperature100 °Cno data
Number of transistors291 Million154 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--

Compatibility

Information on Celeron M 560 and Athlon 64 X2 4000+ 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
SocketPPGA478AM2
Power consumption (TDP)30 Watt89 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.



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 M 560 535
Athlon 64 X2 4000+ 692
+29.3%

Pros & cons summary


Physical cores 1 2
Threads 1 2
Chip lithography 65 nm 90 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 30 Watt 89 Watt

Celeron M 560 has a 38.5% more advanced lithography process, and 196.7% lower power consumption.

Athlon 64 X2 4000+, on the other hand, has 100% more physical cores and 100% more threads.

We couldn't decide between Celeron M 560 and Athlon 64 X2 4000+. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that Celeron M 560 is a notebook processor while Athlon 64 X2 4000+ is a desktop one.


Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron M 560 and Athlon 64 X2 4000+, 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 560
Celeron M 560
AMD Athlon 64 X2 4000+
Athlon 64 X2 4000+

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.


2.7 43 votes

Rate Celeron M 560 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.1 190 votes

Rate Athlon 64 X2 4000 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Celeron M 560 or Athlon 64 X2 4000+, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.