Turion II Neo K685 vs Celeron Dual-Core T3100

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

Celeron Dual-Core T3100
2009
2 cores / 2 threads, 35 Watt
0.74
+72.1%
Turion II Neo K685
2010
2 cores / 2 threads, 15 Watt
0.43

Celeron Dual-Core T3100 outperforms Turion II Neo K685 by an impressive 72% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Celeron Dual-Core T3100 and Turion II Neo K685 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking26812969
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
SeriesIntel Celeron Dual-CoreAMD Turion II Neo
Power efficiency2.002.71
Architecture codenamePenryn (2008−2011)Geneva (2010)
Release date1 September 2009 (15 years ago)15 December 2010 (14 years ago)

Detailed specifications

Celeron Dual-Core T3100 and Turion II Neo K685 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)2 (Dual-core)
Threads22
Boost clock speed1.9 GHz1.8 GHz
Bus rate800 MHz3200 MHz
L1 cache128 KB256 KB
L2 cache1 MB1 MB
Chip lithography45 nm45 nm
Die size107 mm2no data
Maximum core temperature105 °Cno data
Number of transistors410 Millionno data
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--

Compatibility

Information on Celeron Dual-Core T3100 and Turion II Neo K685 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.

SocketBGA479, PGA478S1g4
Power consumption (TDP)35 Watt15 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron Dual-Core T3100 and Turion II Neo K685. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsno dataMMX, 3DNow, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSE4A, AMD64, Enhanced Virus Protection, Virtualization
VirusProtect-+

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Celeron Dual-Core T3100 and Turion II Neo K685 are enumerated here.

AMD-V-+

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron Dual-Core T3100 and Turion II Neo K685. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesno dataDDR3

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 Dual-Core T3100 0.74
+72.1%
Turion II Neo K685 0.43

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 Dual-Core T3100 1174
+71.6%
Turion II Neo K685 684

Cinebench 10 32-bit single-core

Cinebench R10 is an ancient ray tracing benchmark for processors by Maxon, authors of Cinema 4D. Its single core version uses just one CPU thread to render a futuristic looking motorcycle.

Celeron Dual-Core T3100 1900
+33.4%
Turion II Neo K685 1424

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.

Celeron Dual-Core T3100 3740
+21.3%
Turion II Neo K685 3083

3DMark06 CPU

3DMark06 is a discontinued DirectX 9 benchmark suite from Futuremark. Its CPU part contains two scenarios, one dedicated to artificial intelligence pathfinding, another to game physics using PhysX package.

Celeron Dual-Core T3100 1687
+16.3%
Turion II Neo K685 1451

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.74 0.43
Recency 1 September 2009 15 December 2010
Power consumption (TDP) 35 Watt 15 Watt

Celeron Dual-Core T3100 has a 72.1% higher aggregate performance score.

Turion II Neo K685, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 1 year, and 133.3% lower power consumption.

The Celeron Dual-Core T3100 is our recommended choice as it beats the Turion II Neo K685 in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron Dual-Core T3100 and Turion II Neo K685, 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 Dual-Core T3100
Celeron Dual-Core T3100
AMD Turion II Neo K685
Turion II Neo K685

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.


3.5 35 votes

Rate Celeron Dual-Core T3100 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4 1 vote

Rate Turion II Neo K685 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Celeron Dual-Core T3100 or Turion II Neo K685, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.