Celeron B830 vs Athlon II P320

VS

Primary details

Comparing Athlon II P320 and Celeron B830 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the rankingnot rated2836
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
SeriesAMD Athlon IIIntel Celeron
Power efficiencyno data1.46
Architecture codenameChamplain (2010−2011)Sandy Bridge (2011−2013)
Release date12 May 2010 (14 years ago)1 September 2012 (12 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$86

Detailed specifications

Athlon II P320 and Celeron B830 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 data1.8 GHz
Boost clock speed2.1 GHz1.8 GHz
Bus typeno dataDMI 2.0
Bus rate3200 MHz4 × 5 GT/s
Multiplierno data18
L1 cache256 KB64K (per core)
L2 cache1 MB256K (per core)
L3 cacheno data2 MB (shared)
Chip lithography45 nm32 nm
Die sizeno data131 mm2
Maximum core temperatureno data100 °C
Number of transistorsno data504 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--

Compatibility

Information on Athlon II P320 and Celeron B830 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 (Uniprocessor)
SocketS1g4FCPGA988,PGA988
Power consumption (TDP)25 Watt35 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Athlon II P320 and Celeron B830. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsSSE-3, SSE4A, 3DNow!, MMX, DEP, SVMIntel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2
FMA-+
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)no data+
My WiFino data-
Turbo Boost Technologyno data-
Hyper-Threading Technologyno data-
Idle Statesno data+
Thermal Monitoring-+
Flex Memory Accessno data+
Demand Based Switchingno data-
FDIno data+
Fast Memory Accessno data+

Security technologies

Athlon II P320 and Celeron B830 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXTno data-
EDBno data+
Anti-Theftno data-

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Athlon II P320 and Celeron B830 are enumerated here.

VT-dno data-
VT-xno data+

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Athlon II P320 and Celeron B830. 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 for 2nd Generation Intel® Processors
Graphics max frequencyno data1.05 GHz

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of Athlon II P320 and Celeron B830 integrated GPUs.

Number of displays supportedno data2
eDPno data+
DisplayPort-+
HDMI-+
SDVOno data+
CRTno data+

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Athlon II P320 and Celeron B830.

PCIe versionno data2.0
PCI Express lanesno data16

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 II P320 695
Celeron B830 857
+23.3%

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 170
Celeron B830 260
+52.9%

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 314
Celeron B830 452
+43.9%

Pros & cons summary


Recency 12 May 2010 1 September 2012
Chip lithography 45 nm 32 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 25 Watt 35 Watt

Athlon II P320 has 40% lower power consumption.

Celeron B830, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 2 years, and a 40.6% more advanced lithography process.

We couldn't decide between Athlon II P320 and Celeron B830. We've got no test results to judge.


Should you still have questions on choice between Athlon II P320 and Celeron B830, 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 B830
Celeron B830

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 74 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.8 89 votes

Rate Celeron B830 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 B830, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.