Celeron E3400 vs Athlon 64 X2 4600+

VS

Primary details

Comparing Athlon 64 X2 (Desktop) 4600+ and Celeron E3400 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the rankingnot rated2832
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data3.72
Market segmentDesktop processorDesktop processor
Series2x Athlon 64 (Desktop)no data
Power efficiencyno data0.80
Architecture codenameWindsor (2006−2007)Wolfdale (2008−2010)
Release dateno data (2024 years ago)17 January 2010 (14 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$76

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Detailed specifications

Athlon 64 X2 (Desktop) 4600+ and Celeron E3400 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
Base clock speedno data2.6 GHz
Boost clock speed2.4 GHz2.6 GHz
Bus rate1000 MHzno data
L1 cacheno data64 KB (per core)
L2 cacheno data1 MB (shared)
L3 cacheno data0 KB
Chip lithography90 nm45 nm
Die sizeno data82 mm2
Maximum core temperatureno data74 °C
Number of transistorsno data228 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--
VID voltage rangeno data0.85V-1.3625V

Compatibility

Information on Athlon 64 X2 (Desktop) 4600+ and Celeron E3400 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 configurationno data1
Socketno dataLGA775
Power consumption (TDP)65 Watt65 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Athlon 64 X2 (Desktop) 4600+ and Celeron E3400. 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-+

Security technologies

Athlon 64 X2 (Desktop) 4600+ and Celeron E3400 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 X2 (Desktop) 4600+ and Celeron E3400 are enumerated here.

VT-dno data-
VT-xno data+

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Athlon 64 X2 (Desktop) 4600+ and Celeron E3400. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesno dataDDR1, DDR2, DDR3

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Athlon 64 X2 (Desktop) 4600+ and Celeron E3400.

PCIe versionno data2.0

Synthetic benchmark performance

Various benchmark results of the processors in comparison. Overall score is measured in points in 0-100 range, higher is better.



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 4600+ 720
Celeron E3400 869
+20.7%

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 4600+ 227
Celeron E3400 290
+27.8%

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 4600+ 409
Celeron E3400 485
+18.6%

Pros & cons summary


Chip lithography 90 nm 45 nm

Celeron E3400 has a 100% more advanced lithography process.

We couldn't decide between Athlon 64 X2 4600+ and Celeron E3400. We've got no test results to judge.


Should you still have questions on choice between Athlon 64 X2 4600+ and Celeron E3400, 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 4600+
Athlon 64 X2 4600+
Intel Celeron E3400
Celeron E3400

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.


3 133 votes

Rate Athlon 64 X2 4600 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.2 268 votes

Rate Celeron E3400 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Athlon 64 X2 4600+ or Celeron E3400, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.