Athlon X4 970 vs Celeron E3500

VS

Aggregate performance score

Celeron E3500
2010
2 cores / 2 threads, 65 Watt
0.59
Athlon X4 970
2017
4 cores / 4 threads, 65 Watt
1.66
+181%

Athlon X4 970 outperforms Celeron E3500 by a whopping 181% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Celeron E3500 and Athlon X4 970 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking27992060
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation2.99no data
Market segmentDesktop processorDesktop processor
Power efficiency0.862.42
Architecture codenameWolfdale (2008−2010)Bristol Ridge (2016−2019)
Release date29 August 2010 (14 years ago)27 July 2017 (7 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$62no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Detailed specifications

Celeron E3500 and Athlon X4 970 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 speed2.7 GHz3.8 GHz
Boost clock speed2.7 GHz4 GHz
L1 cache64 KB (per core)128 KB (per core)
L2 cache1 MB (shared)512 KB (per core)
L3 cache0 KB0 KB
Chip lithography45 nm28 nm
Die size82 mm2246 mm2
Maximum core temperature74 °Cno data
Maximum case temperature (TCase)no data74 °C
Number of transistors228 million1,178 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--
Unlocked multiplier-+
VID voltage range0.85V-1.3625Vno data

Compatibility

Information on Celeron E3500 and Athlon X4 970 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
SocketLGA775AM4
Power consumption (TDP)65 Watt65 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron E3500 and Athlon X4 970. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsIntel® SSE2, Intel® SSE3, Intel® SSSE3no data
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 E3500 and Athlon X4 970 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 E3500 and Athlon X4 970 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 E3500 and Athlon X4 970. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR1, DDR2, DDR3DDR4 Dual-channel

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Celeron E3500 and Athlon X4 970.

PCIe version2.0no 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 E3500 0.59
Athlon X4 970 1.66
+181%

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 E3500 935
Athlon X4 970 2644
+183%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.59 1.66
Recency 29 August 2010 27 July 2017
Physical cores 2 4
Threads 2 4
Chip lithography 45 nm 28 nm

Athlon X4 970 has a 181.4% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 6 years, 100% more physical cores and 100% more threads, and a 60.7% more advanced lithography process.

The Athlon X4 970 is our recommended choice as it beats the Celeron E3500 in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron E3500 and Athlon X4 970, 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 E3500
Celeron E3500
AMD Athlon X4 970
Athlon X4 970

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.


3.3 27 votes

Rate Celeron E3500 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.5 118 votes

Rate Athlon X4 970 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Celeron E3500 or Athlon X4 970, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.