Celeron Dual-Core T1400 vs Athlon X2 QL-64
Aggregate performance score
Celeron Dual-Core T1400 outperforms Athlon X2 QL-64 by a moderate 10% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing Athlon X2 QL-64 and Celeron Dual-Core T1400 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 3004 | 2958 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Series | 2x AMD Athlon | Intel Celeron Dual-Core |
| Power efficiency | 1.05 | 1.16 |
| Architecture codename | Lion (2008−2009) | Merom-2M (2008) |
| Release date | 1 January 2009 (15 years ago) | 1 May 2008 (16 years ago) |
Detailed specifications
Athlon X2 QL-64 and Celeron Dual-Core T1400 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) | 2 (Dual-core) |
| Threads | 2 | 2 |
| Boost clock speed | 2.1 GHz | 1.73 GHz |
| Bus rate | 3600 MHz | 533 MHz |
| L1 cache | 256 KB | no data |
| L2 cache | 1 MB | 512 KB |
| L3 cache | 0 KB | no data |
| Chip lithography | 65 nm | 65 nm |
| Maximum core temperature | no data | 100 °C |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
Compatibility
Information on Athlon X2 QL-64 and Celeron Dual-Core T1400 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 configuration | 1 | no data |
| Socket | S1 | P |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 35 Watt | 35 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Athlon X2 QL-64 and Celeron Dual-Core T1400. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, Enhanced 3DNow!, NX bit, AMD64, PowerNow!, AMD Virtualization | no data |
| PowerNow | + | - |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Athlon X2 QL-64 and Celeron Dual-Core T1400 are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | + | - |
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.
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.
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.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 0.39 | 0.43 |
| Recency | 1 January 2009 | 1 May 2008 |
Athlon X2 QL-64 has an age advantage of 8 months.
Celeron Dual-Core T1400, on the other hand, has a 10.3% higher aggregate performance score.
The Celeron Dual-Core T1400 is our recommended choice as it beats the Athlon X2 QL-64 in performance tests.
Should you still have questions on choice between Athlon X2 QL-64 and Celeron Dual-Core T1400, 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.
