Athlon 64 3500+ vs Celeron B800

Primary details

Comparing Celeron B800 and Athlon 64 3500+ processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the rankingnot ratednot rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopDesktop processor
SeriesIntel Celeronno data
Architecture codenameSandy Bridge (2011−2013)San Diego (2001−2005)
Release date19 June 2011 (13 years ago)January 2001 (23 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$80$59

Detailed specifications

Celeron B800 and Athlon 64 3500+ 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)1 (Single-Core)
Threads21
Base clock speed1.5 GHzno data
Boost clock speed1.5 GHz2.2 GHz
Bus typeDMI 2.0no data
Bus rate4 × 5 GT/sno data
Multiplier15no data
L1 cache64K (per core)128 KB
L2 cache256K (per core)512 KB
L3 cache2 MB (shared)0 KB
Chip lithography32 nm130 nm
Die size131 mm2230 mm2
Maximum core temperature100 °Cno data
Number of transistors504 million227 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--

Compatibility

Information on Celeron B800 and Athlon 64 3500+ 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
SocketFCPGA988939
Power consumption (TDP)35 Watt89 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron B800 and Athlon 64 3500+. 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
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 B800 and Athlon 64 3500+ 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 B800 and Athlon 64 3500+ are enumerated here.

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

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron B800 and Athlon 64 3500+. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3no data
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 frequency1 GHzno data

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of Celeron B800 and Athlon 64 3500+ 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 B800 and Athlon 64 3500+.

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.



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 B800 663
+75.9%
Athlon 64 3500+ 377

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.

Celeron B800 247
+91.5%
Athlon 64 3500+ 129

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.

Celeron B800 414
+257%
Athlon 64 3500+ 116

Pros & cons summary


Physical cores 2 1
Threads 2 1
Chip lithography 32 nm 130 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 35 Watt 89 Watt

Celeron B800 has 100% more physical cores and 100% more threads, a 306.3% more advanced lithography process, and 154.3% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between Celeron B800 and Athlon 64 3500+. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that Celeron B800 is a notebook processor while Athlon 64 3500+ is a desktop one.


Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron B800 and Athlon 64 3500+, 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 B800
Celeron B800
AMD Athlon 64 3500+
Athlon 64 3500+

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.


2.6 192 votes

Rate Celeron B800 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.7 52 votes

Rate Athlon 64 3500 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Celeron B800 or Athlon 64 3500+, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.