Athlon II Neo K125 vs Celeron U3400

Place in the ranking	3092	3235
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Market segment	Laptop	Laptop
Series	Intel Celeron	AMD Athlon II Neo
Power efficiency	1.68	1.58
Architecture codename	Westmere (2010−2011)	Geneva (2010)
Release date	24 May 2010 (14 years ago)	12 May 2010 (14 years ago)

Detailed specifications

Celeron U3400 and Athlon II Neo K125 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 cores	2 (Dual-core)	1 (Single-Core)
Threads	2	1
Base clock speed	1.06 GHz	no data
Boost clock speed	0.07 GHz	1.7 GHz
Bus type	DMI 1.0	no data
Bus rate	1 × 2.5 GT/s	2000 MHz
Multiplier	8	no data
L1 cache	128 KB	128 KB
L2 cache	512 KB	1 MB
L3 cache	2 MB	no data
Chip lithography	32 nm	45 nm
Die size	81 mm²	no data
Maximum core temperature	105 °C	no data
Number of transistors	382 Million	no data
64 bit support	+	+
Windows 11 compatibility	-	-

Compatibility

Information on Celeron U3400 and Athlon II Neo K125 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 configuration	1 (Uniprocessor)	no data
Socket	BGA1288	S1
Power consumption (TDP)	18 Watt	12 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron U3400 and Athlon II Neo K125. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensions	no data	MMX, 3dDNow!, SSE4A, AMD64, Enhanced Virus Protection, Virtualization
FMA	+	-
VirusProtect	-	+
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)	+	no data
Turbo Boost Technology	-	no data
Hyper-Threading Technology	-	no data
Idle States	+	no data
Thermal Monitoring	+	-
Flex Memory Access	+	no data
PAE	36 Bit	no data
FDI	+	no data
Fast Memory Access	+	no data

Security technologies

Celeron U3400 and Athlon II Neo K125 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 U3400 and Athlon II Neo K125 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 U3400 and Athlon II Neo K125. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory types	DDR3-800	DDR3
Maximum memory size	8 GB	no data
Max memory channels	2	no data
Maximum memory bandwidth	12.799 GB/s	no data

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics card	Intel HD Graphics for Previous Generation Intel Processors	no data
Clear Video	+	no data
Graphics max frequency	500 MHz	no data

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of Celeron U3400 and Athlon II Neo K125 integrated GPUs.

Number of displays supported

no data

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Celeron U3400 and Athlon II Neo K125.

PCIe version	2.0	no data
PCI Express lanes	16	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.

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 U3400 0.32
+60%

Athlon II Neo K125 0.20

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 U3400 516
+63.8%

Athlon II Neo K125 315

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 U3400 176

Athlon II Neo K125 184
+4.5%

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 U3400 313
+70.1%

Athlon II Neo K125 184

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	0.32	0.20
Physical cores	2	1
Threads	2	1
Chip lithography	32 nm	45 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	18 Watt	12 Watt

Celeron U3400 has a 60% higher aggregate performance score, 100% more physical cores and 100% more threads, and a 40.6% more advanced lithography process.

Athlon II Neo K125, on the other hand, has 50% lower power consumption.

The Celeron U3400 is our recommended choice as it beats the Athlon II Neo K125 in performance tests.

Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron U3400 and Athlon II Neo K125, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.