Celeron E3500 vs Athlon X4 740

VS

Aggregate performance score

Athlon X4 740
2012
4 cores / 4 threads, 65 Watt
1.65
+180%
Celeron E3500
2010
2 cores / 2 threads, 65 Watt
0.59

Athlon X4 740 outperforms Celeron E3500 by a whopping 180% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Athlon X4 740 and Celeron E3500 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking20692801
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data2.99
Market segmentDesktop processorDesktop processor
Power efficiency2.400.86
Architecture codenameTrinity (2012−2013)Wolfdale (2008−2010)
Release date2 October 2012 (12 years ago)29 August 2010 (14 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$62

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Detailed specifications

Athlon X4 740 and Celeron E3500 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 cores4 (Quad-Core)2 (Dual-core)
Threads42
Base clock speed3.2 GHz2.7 GHz
Boost clock speed3.7 GHz2.7 GHz
L1 cache192K64 KB (per core)
L2 cache4 MB (shared)1 MB (shared)
L3 cacheno data0 KB
Chip lithography32 nm45 nm
Die size246 mm282 mm2
Maximum core temperatureno data74 °C
Maximum case temperature (TCase)74 °Cno data
Number of transistors1,303 million228 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibilityno data-
VID voltage rangeno data0.85V-1.3625V

Compatibility

Information on Athlon X4 740 and Celeron E3500 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 configuration11
SocketFM2LGA775
Power consumption (TDP)65 Watt65 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Athlon X4 740 and Celeron E3500. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsno dataIntel® SSE2, Intel® SSE3, Intel® SSSE3
AES-NI+-
FMA+-
AVX+-
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)no data+
Turbo Boost Technologyno data-
Hyper-Threading Technologyno data-
Idle Statesno data+
Thermal Monitoring-+

Security technologies

Athlon X4 740 and Celeron E3500 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXTno data-
EDBno data+

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Athlon X4 740 and Celeron E3500 are enumerated here.

AMD-V+-
VT-dno data-
VT-xno data+

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Athlon X4 740 and Celeron E3500. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3-1866DDR1, DDR2, DDR3

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Athlon X4 740 and Celeron E3500.

PCIe version2.02.0

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 X4 740 1.65
+180%
Celeron E3500 0.59

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 X4 740 2626
+181%
Celeron E3500 935

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 X4 740 377
+37.6%
Celeron E3500 274

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 X4 740 892
+120%
Celeron E3500 406

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.65 0.59
Recency 2 October 2012 29 August 2010
Physical cores 4 2
Threads 4 2
Chip lithography 32 nm 45 nm

Athlon X4 740 has a 179.7% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 2 years, 100% more physical cores and 100% more threads, and a 40.6% more advanced lithography process.

The Athlon X4 740 is our recommended choice as it beats the Celeron E3500 in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between Athlon X4 740 and Celeron E3500, 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 X4 740
Athlon X4 740
Intel Celeron E3500
Celeron E3500

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.


3.6 195 votes

Rate Athlon X4 740 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.3 27 votes

Rate Celeron E3500 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Athlon X4 740 or Celeron E3500, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.