Celeron 220 vs Athlon 64 3600+

VS

Aggregate performance score

Athlon 64 3600+
2004
1 core / 1 thread, 89 Watt
0.38
+192%
Celeron 220
2007
1 core / 1 thread, 19 Watt
0.13

Athlon 64 3600+ outperforms Celeron 220 by a whopping 192% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Athlon 64 3600+ and Celeron 220 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking30293343
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentDesktop processorLaptop
Power efficiency0.400.65
Architecture codenameClawhammer (2001−2005)Conroe (2006−2007)
Release dateJune 2004 (20 years ago)October 2007 (17 years ago)

Detailed specifications

Athlon 64 3600+ and Celeron 220 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)1 (Single-Core)
Threads11
Base clock speedno data1.2 GHz
Boost clock speed2.4 GHz1.2 GHz
Bus rateno data533 MHz
L1 cache128K64 KB
L2 cache1 MB512 KB
L3 cacheno data0 KB
Chip lithography130 nm65 nm
Die size193 mm277 mm2
Maximum core temperatureno data100 °C
Maximum case temperature (TCase)70 °Cno data
Number of transistors106 million105 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--
VID voltage rangeno data1V-1.3375V

Compatibility

Information on Athlon 64 3600+ and Celeron 220 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 configuration11
Socket754PBGA479
Power consumption (TDP)89 Watt19 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Athlon 64 3600+ and Celeron 220. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)no data-
Turbo Boost Technologyno data-
Hyper-Threading Technologyno data-
Idle Statesno data+
Thermal Monitoring-+
Demand Based Switchingno data-
FSB parityno data-

Security technologies

Athlon 64 3600+ and Celeron 220 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXTno data-
EDBno data+

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Athlon 64 3600+ and Celeron 220 are enumerated here.

VT-dno data-
VT-xno data-

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Athlon 64 3600+ and Celeron 220. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR1no data

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.

Athlon 64 3600+ 0.38
+192%
Celeron 220 0.13

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.

Athlon 64 3600+ 601
+188%
Celeron 220 209

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.38 0.13
Chip lithography 130 nm 65 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 89 Watt 19 Watt

Athlon 64 3600+ has a 192.3% higher aggregate performance score.

Celeron 220, on the other hand, has a 100% more advanced lithography process, and 368.4% lower power consumption.

The Athlon 64 3600+ is our recommended choice as it beats the Celeron 220 in performance tests.

Note that Athlon 64 3600+ is a desktop processor while Celeron 220 is a notebook one.


Should you still have questions on choice between Athlon 64 3600+ and Celeron 220, 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.


AMD Athlon 64 3600+
Athlon 64 3600+
Intel Celeron 220
Celeron 220

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.


2.3 3 votes

Rate Athlon 64 3600 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.3 61 vote

Rate Celeron 220 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Athlon 64 3600+ or Celeron 220, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.