Celeron 807 vs Athlon 64 3600+
Aggregate performance score
Athlon 64 3600+ outperforms Celeron 807 by an impressive 52% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing Athlon 64 3600+ and Celeron 807 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 3013 | 3156 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Desktop processor | Laptop |
| Series | no data | Intel Celeron |
| Power efficiency | 0.40 | 1.39 |
| Architecture codename | Clawhammer (2001−2005) | Sandy Bridge (2011−2013) |
| Release date | June 2004 (20 years ago) | 1 July 2012 (12 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | no data | $70 |
Detailed specifications
Athlon 64 3600+ and Celeron 807 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) | 1 (Single-Core) |
| Threads | 1 | 2 |
| Base clock speed | no data | 1.5 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 2.4 GHz | 1.5 GHz |
| Bus type | no data | DMI 2.0 |
| Bus rate | no data | 4 × 5 GT/s |
| Multiplier | no data | 15 |
| L1 cache | 128K | 64K (per core) |
| L2 cache | 1 MB | 256K (per core) |
| L3 cache | no data | 1.5 MB (shared) |
| Chip lithography | 130 nm | 32 nm |
| Die size | 193 mm2 | 131 mm2 |
| Maximum core temperature | no data | 100 °C |
| Maximum case temperature (TCase) | 70 °C | no data |
| Number of transistors | 106 million | 504 million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
Compatibility
Information on Athlon 64 3600+ and Celeron 807 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 | 1 | 1 (Uniprocessor) |
| Socket | 754 | FCBGA1023 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 89 Watt | 17 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Athlon 64 3600+ and Celeron 807. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | no data | Intel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2 |
| FMA | - | + |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | no data | + |
| My WiFi | no data | - |
| Turbo Boost Technology | no data | - |
| Hyper-Threading Technology | no data | + |
| Idle States | no data | + |
| Thermal Monitoring | - | + |
| Flex Memory Access | no data | + |
| Demand Based Switching | no data | - |
| FDI | no data | + |
| Fast Memory Access | no data | + |
Security technologies
Athlon 64 3600+ and Celeron 807 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| TXT | no data | - |
| EDB | no data | + |
| Anti-Theft | no data | - |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Athlon 64 3600+ and Celeron 807 are enumerated here.
| VT-d | no data | - |
| VT-x | no data | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Athlon 64 3600+ and Celeron 807. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR1 | DDR3 |
| Maximum memory size | no data | 16 GB |
| Max memory channels | no data | 2 |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | no data | 21.335 GB/s |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | no data | Intel HD Graphics for 2nd Generation Intel Processors |
| Graphics max frequency | no data | 950 MHz |
Graphics interfaces
Available interfaces and connections of Athlon 64 3600+ and Celeron 807 integrated GPUs.
| Number of displays supported | no data | 2 |
| eDP | no data | + |
| DisplayPort | - | + |
| HDMI | - | + |
| SDVO | no data | + |
| CRT | no data | + |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Athlon 64 3600+ and Celeron 807.
| PCIe version | no data | 2.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | no data | 16 |
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.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 0.38 | 0.25 |
| Threads | 1 | 2 |
| Chip lithography | 130 nm | 32 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 89 Watt | 17 Watt |
Athlon 64 3600+ has a 52% higher aggregate performance score.
Celeron 807, on the other hand, has 100% more threads, a 306.3% more advanced lithography process, and 423.5% lower power consumption.
The Athlon 64 3600+ is our recommended choice as it beats the Celeron 807 in performance tests.
Note that Athlon 64 3600+ is a desktop processor while Celeron 807 is a notebook one.
Should you still have questions on choice between Athlon 64 3600+ and Celeron 807, 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.
