Mobile Athlon 64 3000+ vs Celeron 807

Aggregate performance score

Celeron 807
2012
1 core / 2 threads, 17 Watt
0.25
Mobile Athlon 64 3000+
2003
1 core / 1 thread, 35 Watt
0.28
+12%

Mobile Athlon 64 3000+ outperforms Celeron 807 by a moderate 12% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Celeron 807 and Mobile Athlon 64 3000+ processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking31563116
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
SeriesIntel CeleronMobile Athlon 64
Power efficiency1.390.76
Architecture codenameSandy Bridge (2011−2013)Oakville (2003−2004)
Release date1 July 2012 (12 years ago)August 2003 (21 year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$70no data

Detailed specifications

Celeron 807 and Mobile Athlon 64 3000+ 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 cores1 (Single-Core)1 (Single-Core)
Threads21
Base clock speed1.5 GHzno data
Boost clock speed1.5 GHz2 GHz
Bus typeDMI 2.0no data
Bus rate4 × 5 GT/s800 MHz
Multiplier15no data
L1 cache64K (per core)128K
L2 cache256K (per core)512K
L3 cache1.5 MB (shared)no data
Chip lithography32 nmno data
Die size131 mm2193 mm2
Maximum core temperature100 °Cno data
Number of transistors504 million106 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--

Compatibility

Information on Celeron 807 and Mobile Athlon 64 3000+ 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 configuration1 (Uniprocessor)1
SocketFCBGA1023754
Power consumption (TDP)17 Watt35 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron 807 and Mobile Athlon 64 3000+. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsIntel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2no data
FMA+-
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)+no data
My WiFi-no data
Turbo Boost Technology-no data
Hyper-Threading Technology+no data
Idle States+no data
Thermal Monitoring+-
Flex Memory Access+no data
Demand Based Switching-no data
FDI+no data
Fast Memory Access+no data

Security technologies

Celeron 807 and Mobile Athlon 64 3000+ technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXT-no data
EDB+no data
Anti-Theft-no data

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Celeron 807 and Mobile Athlon 64 3000+ are enumerated here.

VT-d-no data
VT-x+no data

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron 807 and Mobile Athlon 64 3000+. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3DDR1
Maximum memory size16 GBno data
Max memory channels2no data
Maximum memory bandwidth21.335 GB/sno data

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardIntel HD Graphics for 2nd Generation Intel Processorsno data
Graphics max frequency950 MHzno data

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of Celeron 807 and Mobile Athlon 64 3000+ integrated GPUs.

Number of displays supported2no data
eDP+no data
DisplayPort+-
HDMI+-
SDVO+no data
CRT+no data

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Celeron 807 and Mobile Athlon 64 3000+.

PCIe version2.0no data
PCI Express lanes16no 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.

Celeron 807 0.25
Mobile Athlon 64 3000+ 0.28
+12%

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.

Celeron 807 392
Mobile Athlon 64 3000+ 450
+14.8%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.25 0.28
Threads 2 1
Power consumption (TDP) 17 Watt 35 Watt

Celeron 807 has 100% more threads, and 105.9% lower power consumption.

Mobile Athlon 64 3000+, on the other hand, has a 12% higher aggregate performance score.

The Mobile Athlon 64 3000+ is our recommended choice as it beats the Celeron 807 in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron 807 and Mobile Athlon 64 3000+, 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.


Intel Celeron 807
Celeron 807
AMD Mobile Athlon 64 3000+
Mobile Athlon 64 3000+

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 votes

Rate Celeron 807 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

No user ratings yet.

Rate Mobile Athlon 64 3000 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Celeron 807 or Mobile Athlon 64 3000+, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.