Athlon 64 X2 5000+ vs Celeron Dual-Core T3300

Primary details

Comparing Celeron Dual-Core T3300 and Athlon 64 X2 5000+ 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 Celeron Dual-Coreno data
Architecture codenamePenryn (2008−2011)Windsor (2006−2007)
Release date1 February 2010 (14 years ago)May 2006 (18 years ago)

Detailed specifications

Celeron Dual-Core T3300 and Athlon 64 X2 5000+ 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 speed2 GHz2.6 GHz
Bus rate800 MHzno data
L1 cache128 KB256 KB
L2 cache1 MB512 KB
L3 cacheno data0 KB
Chip lithography45 nm90 nm
Die sizeno data220 mm2
Number of transistorsno data154 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--

Compatibility

Information on Celeron Dual-Core T3300 and Athlon 64 X2 5000+ 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 configurationno data1
SocketSocket P 478AM2
Power consumption (TDP)35 Watt89 Watt

Security technologies

Celeron Dual-Core T3300 and Athlon 64 X2 5000+ technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

EDB+no 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 Dual-Core T3300 633
Athlon 64 X2 5000+ 787
+24.3%

Pros & cons summary


Chip lithography 45 nm 90 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 35 Watt 89 Watt

Celeron Dual-Core T3300 has a 100% more advanced lithography process, and 154.3% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between Celeron Dual-Core T3300 and Athlon 64 X2 5000+. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that Celeron Dual-Core T3300 is a notebook processor while Athlon 64 X2 5000+ is a desktop one.


Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron Dual-Core T3300 and Athlon 64 X2 5000+, 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 T3300
Celeron Dual-Core T3300
AMD Athlon 64 X2 5000+
Athlon 64 X2 5000+

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.


2.5 35 votes

Rate Celeron Dual-Core T3300 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.7 179 votes

Rate Athlon 64 X2 5000 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Celeron Dual-Core T3300 or Athlon 64 X2 5000+, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.