Athlon 64 X2 3800+ vs Celeron G1610

Primary details

Comparing Celeron G1610 and Athlon 64 X2 3800+ processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking2494not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.01no data
Market segmentDesktop processorDesktop processor
Power efficiency1.64no data
Architecture codenameIvy Bridge (2012−2013)Manchester (2005−2006)
Release date3 December 2012 (11 years ago)August 2005 (19 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$388no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Detailed specifications

Celeron G1610 and Athlon 64 X2 3800+ 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
Base clock speed2.6 GHzno data
Boost clock speed2.6 GHz2 GHz
Bus rate5 GT/sno data
L1 cache64 KB (per core)256K
L2 cache256 KB (per core)512 KB
L3 cache2 MB (shared)0 KB
Chip lithography22 nm90 nm
Die size94 mm2220 mm2
Maximum case temperature (TCase)65 °Cno data
Number of transistorsno data154 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--

Compatibility

Information on Celeron G1610 and Athlon 64 X2 3800+ 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
SocketFCLGA1155939
Power consumption (TDP)55 Watt89 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron G1610 and Athlon 64 X2 3800+. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsIntel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2no data
AVX+-
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)+no data
My WiFi-no data
Turbo Boost Technology-no data
Hyper-Threading Technology-no data
Idle States+no data
Thermal Monitoring+-

Security technologies

Celeron G1610 and Athlon 64 X2 3800+ technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXT-no data
EDB+no data
Secure Key-no data
Anti-Theft-no data

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Celeron G1610 and Athlon 64 X2 3800+ are enumerated here.

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

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron G1610 and Athlon 64 X2 3800+. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3no data
Maximum memory size32 GBno data
Max memory channels2no data
Maximum memory bandwidth21 GB/sno data
ECC memory support+-

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardIntel® HD Graphics for 3rd Generation Intel® Processorsno data
Graphics max frequency1.05 GHzno data

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of Celeron G1610 and Athlon 64 X2 3800+ integrated GPUs.

Number of displays supported3no data

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Celeron G1610 and Athlon 64 X2 3800+.

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.



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 G1610 1519
+141%
Athlon 64 X2 3800+ 629

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 G1610 409
+101%
Athlon 64 X2 3800+ 203

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 G1610 678
+80.3%
Athlon 64 X2 3800+ 376

Pros & cons summary


Chip lithography 22 nm 90 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 55 Watt 89 Watt

Celeron G1610 has a 309.1% more advanced lithography process, and 61.8% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between Celeron G1610 and Athlon 64 X2 3800+. We've got no test results to judge.


Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron G1610 and Athlon 64 X2 3800+, 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 G1610
Celeron G1610
AMD Athlon 64 X2 3800+
Athlon 64 X2 3800+

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.


3.1 235 votes

Rate Celeron G1610 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.9 94 votes

Rate Athlon 64 X2 3800 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Celeron G1610 or Athlon 64 X2 3800+, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.