Athlon 64 2700+ vs Celeron M 350

VS

Primary details

Comparing Celeron M 350 and Athlon 64 2700+ 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 segmentLaptopLaptop
SeriesCeleron Mno data
Architecture codenameDothan (2004−2005)NewCastle (2004)
Release dateno data (2024 years ago)April 2004 (20 years ago)

Detailed specifications

Celeron M 350 and Athlon 64 2700+ 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 cores1 (Single-Core)1 (Single-Core)
Threads11
Base clock speed1.3 GHzno data
Boost clock speed1.3 GHz1.6 GHz
Bus rate400 MHzno data
L1 cacheno data128 KB
L2 cacheno data512 KB
L3 cache1 MB L2 KB0 KB
Chip lithography90 nm130 nm
Die sizeno data144 mm2
Maximum core temperature100 °Cno data
Number of transistorsno data69 million
64 bit support--
Windows 11 compatibility--
VID voltage range1.26Vno data

Compatibility

Information on Celeron M 350 and Athlon 64 2700+ 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
SocketPPGA478, H-PBGA479, H-PBGA478, PPGA479754
Power consumption (TDP)21 Watt32 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron M 350 and Athlon 64 2700+. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)-no data
Turbo Boost Technology-no data
Hyper-Threading Technology-no data
Idle States-no data
Demand Based Switching-no data
PAE32 Bitno data
FSB parity-no data

Security technologies

Celeron M 350 and Athlon 64 2700+ 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 M 350 and Athlon 64 2700+ are enumerated here.

VT-x-no data

Pros & cons summary


Chip lithography 90 nm 130 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 21 Watt 32 Watt

Celeron M 350 has a 44.4% more advanced lithography process, and 52.4% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between Celeron M 350 and Athlon 64 2700+. We've got no test results to judge.


Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron M 350 and Athlon 64 2700+, 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 M 350
Celeron M 350
AMD Athlon 64 2700+
Athlon 64 2700+

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.


4 6 votes

Rate Celeron M 350 on a scale of 1 to 5:

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

Rate Athlon 64 2700 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Celeron M 350 or Athlon 64 2700+, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.