Celeron M 390 vs Athlon Neo X2 L325
Aggregate performance score
Athlon Neo X2 L325 outperforms Celeron M 390 by an impressive 94% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing Athlon Neo X2 L325 and Celeron M 390 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 3059 | 3255 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Series | 2x AMD Athlon Neo | Celeron M |
| Power efficiency | 1.83 | 0.81 |
| Architecture codename | Congo (2009) | Dothan (2004−2005) |
| Release date | 10 September 2009 (15 years ago) | no data |
Detailed specifications
Athlon Neo X2 L325 and Celeron M 390 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 cores | 2 (Dual-core) | 1 (Single-Core) |
| Threads | 2 | 1 |
| Base clock speed | no data | 1.7 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1.5 GHz | 1.7 GHz |
| Bus rate | 1600 MHz | 400 MHz |
| L2 cache | 1 MB | no data |
| L3 cache | no data | 1 MB L2 KB |
| Chip lithography | 65 nm | 90 nm |
| Maximum core temperature | 95 °C | 100 °C |
| 64 bit support | + | - |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
| VID voltage range | no data | 1.004V-1.292V |
Compatibility
Information on Athlon Neo X2 L325 and Celeron M 390 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.
| Socket | ASB1 | PPGA478, H-PBGA479 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 18 Watt | 21 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Athlon Neo X2 L325 and Celeron M 390. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | HyperTransport 3.0, MMX, 3DNow!, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, AMD64, Enhanced Virus Protection, Virtualization Technology | no data |
| VirusProtect | + | - |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | no data | - |
| Turbo Boost Technology | no data | - |
| Hyper-Threading Technology | no data | - |
| Idle States | no data | - |
| Demand Based Switching | no data | - |
| PAE | no data | 32 Bit |
| FSB parity | no data | - |
Security technologies
Athlon Neo X2 L325 and Celeron M 390 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| TXT | no data | - |
| EDB | no data | + |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Athlon Neo X2 L325 and Celeron M 390 are enumerated here.
| VT-x | no data | - |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Athlon Neo X2 L325 and Celeron M 390. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR2 | no data |
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 0.35 | 0.18 |
| Physical cores | 2 | 1 |
| Threads | 2 | 1 |
| Chip lithography | 65 nm | 90 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 18 Watt | 21 Watt |
Athlon Neo X2 L325 has a 94.4% higher aggregate performance score, 100% more physical cores and 100% more threads, a 38.5% more advanced lithography process, and 16.7% lower power consumption.
The Athlon Neo X2 L325 is our recommended choice as it beats the Celeron M 390 in performance tests.
Should you still have questions on choice between Athlon Neo X2 L325 and Celeron M 390, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
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.
