Celeron Dual-Core T1600 vs Athlon II P360

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

Athlon II P360
2010
2 cores / 2 threads, 25 Watt
0.45
Celeron Dual-Core T1600
2008
2 cores / 2 threads, 35 Watt
0.60
+33.3%

Celeron Dual-Core T1600 outperforms Athlon II P360 by a substantial 33% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Athlon II P360 and Celeron Dual-Core T1600 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking29502809
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
SeriesAMD Athlon IIIntel Celeron Dual-Core
Power efficiency1.701.62
Architecture codenameChamplain (2010−2011)Merom (2006−2008)
Release date16 December 2010 (14 years ago)1 May 2008 (16 years ago)

Detailed specifications

Athlon II P360 and Celeron Dual-Core T1600 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 speed2.3 GHz1.66 GHz
Bus rate3200 MHz667 MHz
L1 cache256 KBno data
L2 cache1 MB1 MB
Chip lithography45 nm65 nm
Die sizeno data143 mm2
Maximum core temperatureno data100 °C
Number of transistorsno data291 Million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--

Compatibility

Information on Athlon II P360 and Celeron Dual-Core T1600 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.

SocketS1g4PPGA478
Power consumption (TDP)25 Watt35 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Athlon II P360 and Celeron Dual-Core T1600. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsSSE-3, SSE4A, 3DNow!, MMX, DEP, SVMno data

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 P360 0.45
Celeron Dual-Core T1600 0.60
+33.3%

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 P360 711
Celeron Dual-Core T1600 950
+33.6%

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 P360 3728
+24.3%
Celeron Dual-Core T1600 3000

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 P360 1797
+33.1%
Celeron Dual-Core T1600 1350

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.45 0.60
Recency 16 December 2010 1 May 2008
Chip lithography 45 nm 65 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 25 Watt 35 Watt

Athlon II P360 has an age advantage of 2 years, a 44.4% more advanced lithography process, and 40% lower power consumption.

Celeron Dual-Core T1600, on the other hand, has a 33.3% higher aggregate performance score.

The Celeron Dual-Core T1600 is our recommended choice as it beats the Athlon II P360 in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between Athlon II P360 and Celeron Dual-Core T1600, 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 P360
Athlon II P360
Intel Celeron Dual-Core T1600
Celeron Dual-Core T1600

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.


3.4 97 votes

Rate Athlon II P360 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.5 13 votes

Rate Celeron Dual-Core T1600 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Athlon II P360 or Celeron Dual-Core T1600, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.