Celeron B800 vs Athlon 64 X2 4200+

VS

Aggregate performance score

Athlon 64 X2 4200+
2006
2 cores / 2 threads, 89 Watt
0.46
+9.5%
Celeron B800
2011
2 cores / 2 threads, 35 Watt
0.42

Athlon 64 X2 4200+ outperforms Celeron B800 by a moderate 10% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Athlon 64 X2 4200+ and Celeron B800 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking29392990
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentDesktop processorLaptop
Seriesno dataIntel Celeron
Power efficiency0.491.13
Architecture codenameManchester (2005−2006)Sandy Bridge (2011−2013)
Release dateDecember 2006 (18 years ago)19 June 2011 (13 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$309$80

Detailed specifications

Athlon 64 X2 4200+ and Celeron B800 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 speed2.2 GHz1.5 GHz
Bus typeno dataDMI 2.0
Bus rateno data4 × 5 GT/s
Multiplierno data15
L1 cache256K64K (per core)
L2 cache512 KB256K (per core)
L3 cache0 KB2 MB (shared)
Chip lithography90 nm32 nm
Die size220 mm2131 mm2
Maximum core temperatureno data100 °C
Number of transistors154 million504 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--

Compatibility

Information on Athlon 64 X2 4200+ and Celeron B800 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 (Uniprocessor)
Socket939G2 (988B)
Power consumption (TDP)89 Watt35 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Athlon 64 X2 4200+ and Celeron B800. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

FMA-+
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)no data+
Idle Statesno data+
Thermal Monitoring-+

Security technologies

Athlon 64 X2 4200+ and Celeron B800 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

EDBno data+

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Athlon 64 X2 4200+ and Celeron B800 are enumerated here.

VT-xno data+

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Athlon 64 X2 4200+ and Celeron B800. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesno dataDDR3
Maximum memory sizeno data16 GB
Max memory channelsno data2
Maximum memory bandwidthno data21.335 GB/s

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardno dataIntel HD Graphics (Sandy Bridge) (650 - 1000 MHz)

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 X2 4200+ 0.46
+9.5%
Celeron B800 0.42

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 X2 4200+ 731
+10.3%
Celeron B800 663

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.

Athlon 64 X2 4200+ 164
Celeron B800 247
+50.6%

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.

Athlon 64 X2 4200+ 278
Celeron B800 416
+49.6%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.46 0.42
Chip lithography 90 nm 32 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 89 Watt 35 Watt

Athlon 64 X2 4200+ has a 9.5% higher aggregate performance score.

Celeron B800, on the other hand, has a 181.3% more advanced lithography process, and 154.3% lower power consumption.

Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between Athlon 64 X2 4200+ and Celeron B800.

Note that Athlon 64 X2 4200+ is a desktop processor while Celeron B800 is a notebook one.


Should you still have questions on choice between Athlon 64 X2 4200+ and Celeron B800, 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 X2 4200+
Athlon 64 X2 4200+
Intel Celeron B800
Celeron B800

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.


3.2 149 votes

Rate Athlon 64 X2 4200 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.6 193 votes

Rate Celeron B800 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Athlon 64 X2 4200+ or Celeron B800, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.