Athlon X4 730 vs Celeron E3200

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

Celeron E3200
2009
2 cores / 2 threads, 65 Watt
0.55
Athlon X4 730
2012
4 cores / 4 threads, 65 Watt
1.49
+171%

Athlon X4 730 outperforms Celeron E3200 by a whopping 171% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Celeron E3200 and Athlon X4 730 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking28482178
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation2.88no data
Market segmentDesktop processorDesktop processor
Power efficiency0.772.09
Architecture codenameWolfdale (2008−2010)Trinity (2012−2013)
Release date30 August 2009 (15 years ago)2 October 2012 (12 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$52no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Detailed specifications

Celeron E3200 and Athlon X4 730 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)4 (Quad-Core)
Threads24
Base clock speed2.4 GHz2.8 GHz
Boost clock speed2.4 GHz3.2 GHz
L1 cache64 KB (per core)192K
L2 cache1 MB (shared)4 MB (shared)
L3 cache0 KBno data
Chip lithography45 nm32 nm
Die size82 mm2246 mm2
Maximum core temperature74 °Cno data
Maximum case temperature (TCase)no data74 °C
Number of transistors228 million1,303 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility-no data
VID voltage range0.85V-1.3625Vno data

Compatibility

Information on Celeron E3200 and Athlon X4 730 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
SocketLGA775FM2
Power consumption (TDP)65 Watt65 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron E3200 and Athlon X4 730. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

AES-NI-+
FMA-+
AVX-+
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)+no data
Turbo Boost Technology-no data
Hyper-Threading Technology-no data
Idle States+no data
Thermal Monitoring+-

Security technologies

Celeron E3200 and Athlon X4 730 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXT-no data
EDB+no data

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Celeron E3200 and Athlon X4 730 are enumerated here.

AMD-V-+
VT-d-no data
VT-x+no data

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron E3200 and Athlon X4 730. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR1, DDR2, DDR3DDR3-1866

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardOn certain motherboards (Chipset feature)no data

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Celeron E3200 and Athlon X4 730.

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.

Celeron E3200 0.55
Athlon X4 730 1.49
+171%

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 E3200 839
Athlon X4 730 2278
+172%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.55 1.49
Recency 30 August 2009 2 October 2012
Physical cores 2 4
Threads 2 4
Chip lithography 45 nm 32 nm

Athlon X4 730 has a 170.9% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 3 years, 100% more physical cores and 100% more threads, and a 40.6% more advanced lithography process.

The Athlon X4 730 is our recommended choice as it beats the Celeron E3200 in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron E3200 and Athlon X4 730, 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 E3200
Celeron E3200
AMD Athlon X4 730
Athlon X4 730

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.


3.1 75 votes

Rate Celeron E3200 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.5 39 votes

Rate Athlon X4 730 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Celeron E3200 or Athlon X4 730, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.