Athlon Neo X2 L325 vs Celeron M 560
Primary details
Comparing Celeron M 560 and Athlon Neo X2 L325 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in performance ranking | not rated | not rated |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Series | Intel Celeron M | 2x AMD Athlon Neo |
| Architecture codename | Merom (2006−2008) | Congo (2009) |
| Release date | 1 May 2008 (16 years ago) | 10 September 2009 (14 years ago) |
| Current price | $49 | no data |
Detailed specifications
Celeron M 560 and Athlon Neo X2 L325 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 | 2.13 GHz | 1.5 GHz |
| Bus support | 533 MHz | 1600 MHz |
| L1 cache | 64 KB | no data |
| L2 cache | 1 MB | 1 MB |
| Chip lithography | 65 nm | 65 nm |
| Die size | 143 mm2 | no data |
| Maximum core temperature | no data | 95 °C |
| Number of transistors | 291 Million | no data |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
| Unlocked multiplier | No | No |
Compatibility
Information on Celeron M 560 and Athlon Neo X2 L325 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 | ASB1 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 30 Watt | 18 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron M 560 and Athlon Neo X2 L325. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | no data | Integrated DDR2 memory controller, HyperTransport 3.0, MMX, 3DNow!, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, AMD64, Enhanced Virus Protection, Virtualization Technology |
| VirusProtect | no data | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron M 560 and Athlon Neo X2 L325. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | no data | DDR2 |
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.
Benchmark coverage: 68%
Athlon Neo X2 L325 outperforms Celeron M 560 by 4% in Passmark.
Pros & cons summary
| Recency | 1 May 2008 | 10 September 2009 |
| Physical cores | 1 | 2 |
| Threads | 1 | 2 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 30 Watt | 18 Watt |
We couldn't decide between Celeron M 560 and Athlon Neo X2 L325. We've got no test results to judge.
Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron M 560 and Athlon Neo X2 L325, 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.
