Celeron 1000M vs Athlon II P320

VS

Aggregate performance score

Athlon II P320
2010
2 cores / 2 threads, 25 Watt
0.44
Celeron 1000M
2013
2 cores / 2 threads, 35 Watt
0.67
+52.3%

Celeron 1000M outperforms Athlon II P320 by an impressive 52% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Athlon II P320 and Celeron 1000M processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking29592746
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
SeriesAMD Athlon IIIntel Celeron
Power efficiency1.661.81
Architecture codenameChamplain (2010−2011)Ivy Bridge (2012−2013)
Release date12 May 2010 (14 years ago)20 January 2013 (11 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$86

Detailed specifications

Athlon II P320 and Celeron 1000M 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 speed2.1 GHz1.8 GHz
Bus rate3200 MHz5 GT/s
L1 cache256 KB64K (per core)
L2 cache1 MB256K (per core)
L3 cacheno data2 MB (shared)
Chip lithography45 nm22 nm
Die sizeno data118 mm2
Maximum core temperatureno data105 °C
Maximum case temperature (TCase)no data105 °C
Number of transistorsno data1,400 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--

Compatibility

Information on Athlon II P320 and Celeron 1000M 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
SocketS1g4G2 (988B)
Power consumption (TDP)25 Watt35 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Athlon II P320 and Celeron 1000M. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsSSE-3, SSE4A, 3DNow!, MMX, DEP, SVMno data
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)no data+
Thermal Monitoring-+

Security technologies

Athlon II P320 and Celeron 1000M technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

EDBno data+

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Athlon II P320 and Celeron 1000M are enumerated here.

VT-xno data+

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Athlon II P320 and Celeron 1000M. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesno dataDDR3

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardno dataIntel HD Graphics (Ivy 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 II P320 0.44
Celeron 1000M 0.67
+52.3%

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 II P320 695
Celeron 1000M 1069
+53.8%

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 II P320 174
Celeron 1000M 296
+70.1%

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 II P320 320
Celeron 1000M 509
+59.1%

Cinebench 10 32-bit single-core

Cinebench R10 is an ancient ray tracing benchmark for processors by Maxon, authors of Cinema 4D. Its single core version uses just one CPU thread to render a futuristic looking motorcycle.

Athlon II P320 1776
Celeron 1000M 2480
+39.6%

Cinebench 10 32-bit multi-core

Cinebench Release 10 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R10 using all the processor threads. Possible number of threads is limited by 16 in this version.

Athlon II P320 3499
Celeron 1000M 4757
+36%

3DMark06 CPU

3DMark06 is a discontinued DirectX 9 benchmark suite from Futuremark. Its CPU part contains two scenarios, one dedicated to artificial intelligence pathfinding, another to game physics using PhysX package.

Athlon II P320 1674
Celeron 1000M 1923
+14.9%

wPrime 32

wPrime 32M is a math multi-thread processor test, which calculates square roots of first 32 million integer numbers. Its result is measured in seconds, so that the less is benchmark result, the faster the processor.

Athlon II P320 36.45
+14.2%
Celeron 1000M 41.63

Cinebench 11.5 64-bit multi-core

Cinebench Release 11.5 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R11.5 which uses all the processor threads. A maximum of 64 threads is supported in this version.

Athlon II P320 1
Celeron 1000M 1
+30.4%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.44 0.67
Recency 12 May 2010 20 January 2013
Chip lithography 45 nm 22 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 25 Watt 35 Watt

Athlon II P320 has 40% lower power consumption.

Celeron 1000M, on the other hand, has a 52.3% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 2 years, and a 104.5% more advanced lithography process.

The Celeron 1000M is our recommended choice as it beats the Athlon II P320 in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between Athlon II P320 and Celeron 1000M, 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 II P320
Athlon II P320
Intel Celeron 1000M
Celeron 1000M

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.


3.5 76 votes

Rate Athlon II P320 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.8 166 votes

Rate Celeron 1000M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Athlon II P320 or Celeron 1000M, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.