Athlon II P320 vs Celeron M P4500

Aggregate performance score

Celeron M P4500
2010
2 cores / 2 threads, 35 Watt
0.62
+40.9%
Athlon II P320
2010
2 cores / 2 threads, 25 Watt
0.44

Celeron M P4500 outperforms Athlon II P320 by a considerable 41% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Celeron M P4500 and Athlon II P320 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking27772944
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
SeriesIntel Celeron MAMD Athlon II
Power efficiency1.681.67
Architecture codenameArrandale (2010−2011)Champlain (2010−2011)
Release date1 April 2010 (14 years ago)12 May 2010 (14 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$86no data

Detailed specifications

Celeron M P4500 and Athlon II P320 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 cores2 (Dual-core)2 (Dual-core)
Threads22
Boost clock speed1.86 GHz2.1 GHz
Bus rate2500 MHz3200 MHz
L1 cache128 KB256 KB
L2 cache512 KB1 MB
L3 cache2 MBno data
Chip lithography32 nm45 nm
Die size81+114 mm2no data
Maximum core temperature90 °Cno data
Number of transistors382+177 Millionno data
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--

Compatibility

Information on Celeron M P4500 and Athlon II P320 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.

SocketPGA988S1g4
Power consumption (TDP)35 Watt25 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron M P4500 and Athlon II P320. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsno dataSSE-3, SSE4A, 3DNow!, MMX, DEP, SVM

Synthetic benchmark performance

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. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

Celeron M P4500 0.62
+40.9%
Athlon II P320 0.44

Cinebench 10 32-bit single-core

Cinebench R10 is an ancient ray tracing benchmark for processors by Maxon, authors of Cinema 4D. Its single core version uses just one CPU thread to render a futuristic looking motorcycle.

Celeron M P4500 2533
+42.6%
Athlon II P320 1776

Cinebench 10 32-bit multi-core

Cinebench Release 10 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R10 using all the processor threads. Possible number of threads is limited by 16 in this version.

Celeron M P4500 4826
+37.9%
Athlon II P320 3499

wPrime 32

wPrime 32M is a math multi-thread processor test, which calculates square roots of first 32 million integer numbers. Its result is measured in seconds, so that the less is benchmark result, the faster the processor.

Celeron M P4500 37.1
Athlon II P320 36.45
+1.8%

Cinebench 11.5 64-bit multi-core

Cinebench Release 11.5 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R11.5 which uses all the processor threads. A maximum of 64 threads is supported in this version.

Celeron M P4500 1
+3.6%
Athlon II P320 1

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.62 0.44
Recency 1 April 2010 12 May 2010
Chip lithography 32 nm 45 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 35 Watt 25 Watt

Celeron M P4500 has a 40.9% higher aggregate performance score, and a 40.6% more advanced lithography process.

Athlon II P320, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 1 month, and 40% lower power consumption.

The Celeron M P4500 is our recommended choice as it beats the Athlon II P320 in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron M P4500 and Athlon II P320, 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 P4500
Celeron M P4500
AMD Athlon II P320
Athlon II P320

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.


3.1 11 votes

Rate Celeron M P4500 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.5 75 votes

Rate Athlon II P320 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Celeron M P4500 or Athlon II P320, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.