Athlon II P360 vs Celeron T3500
Aggregate performance score
Celeron T3500 outperforms Athlon II P360 by a small 7% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing Celeron T3500 and Athlon II P360 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 2915 | 2950 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Series | no data | AMD Athlon II |
| Power efficiency | 1.30 | 1.70 |
| Architecture codename | no data | Champlain (2010−2011) |
| Release date | 1 July 2010 (14 years ago) | 16 December 2010 (14 years ago) |
Detailed specifications
Celeron T3500 and Athlon II P360 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 | no data | 2 (Dual-core) |
| Threads | no data | 2 |
| Base clock speed | 2.1 GHz | no data |
| Boost clock speed | no data | 2.3 GHz |
| Bus rate | no data | 3200 MHz |
| L1 cache | no data | 256 KB |
| L2 cache | no data | 1 MB |
| L3 cache | 1 MB | no data |
| Chip lithography | 45 nm | 45 nm |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
Compatibility
Information on Celeron T3500 and Athlon II P360 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 | PGA478 | S1g4 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 35 Watt | 25 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron T3500 and Athlon II P360. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | no data | SSE-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.
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.
GeekBench 5 Single-Core
GeekBench 5 Single-Core is a cross-platform application developed in the form of CPU tests that independently recreate certain real-world tasks with which to accurately measure performance. This version uses only a single CPU core.
GeekBench 5 Multi-Core
GeekBench 5 Multi-Core is a cross-platform application developed in the form of CPU tests that independently recreate certain real-world tasks with which to accurately measure performance. This version uses all available CPU cores.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 0.48 | 0.45 |
| Recency | 1 July 2010 | 16 December 2010 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 35 Watt | 25 Watt |
Celeron T3500 has a 6.7% higher aggregate performance score.
Athlon II P360, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 5 months, and 40% lower power consumption.
Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between Celeron T3500 and Athlon II P360.
Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron T3500 and Athlon II P360, 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.
