Athlon 64 FX-74 vs Celeron M 585
Aggregate performance score
Athlon 64 FX-74 outperforms Celeron M 585 by a considerable 45% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Contents
Primary details
Comparing processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 3257 | 3081 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | no data | 0.01 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Desktop processor |
| Series | Intel Celeron M | no data |
| Power efficiency | no data | 0.47 |
| Designer | Intel | AMD |
| Architecture codename | Merom (2006−2008) | Windsor (2006−2007) |
| Release date | 20 August 2008 (17 years ago) | November 2006 (19 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $70 | $500 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Performance to price scatter graph
Detailed specifications
Celeron M 585 and Athlon 64 FX-74 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 | 2.16 GHz | 3 GHz |
| Bus rate | 667 MHz | no data |
| L1 cache | no data | 128 KB |
| L2 cache | 1 MB | 1 MB |
| L3 cache | no data | 0 KB |
| Chip lithography | 65 nm | 90 nm |
| Die size | 143 mm2 | 235 mm2 |
| Maximum core temperature | 100 °C | no data |
| Number of transistors | 291 Million | 227 million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
Compatibility
Information on Celeron M 585 and Athlon 64 FX-74 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 | PPGA478 | F |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 1 MB | 125 Watt |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron M 585 and Athlon 64 FX-74. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | no data | DDR1 |
Synthetic benchmarks
Various benchmark results of the processors in comparison. Overall score is measured in points in 0-100 range, higher is better.
Combined synthetic benchmark score
This is our combined benchmark performance rating.
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. Other than that, Passmark measures multi-core performance.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 0.38 | 0.55 |
| Physical cores | 1 | 2 |
| Threads | 1 | 2 |
| Chip lithography | 65 nm | 90 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 1 Watt | 125 Watt |
Celeron M 585 has a 38.5% more advanced lithography process, and 12400% lower power consumption.
Athlon 64 FX-74, on the other hand, has a 44.7% higher aggregate performance score, and 100% more physical cores and 100% more threads.
The AMD Athlon 64 FX-74 is our recommended choice as it beats the Intel Celeron M 585 in performance tests.
Be aware that Celeron M 585 is a notebook processor while Athlon 64 FX-74 is a desktop one.
Other comparisons
We've compiled a selection of CPU comparisons, ranging from closely matched processors to other comparisons that may be of interest.
