Celeron 6205 vs Phenom II X4 805

VS

Primary details

Comparing Phenom II X4 805 and Celeron 6205 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking2301not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.07no data
Market segmentDesktop processorLaptop
Seriesno dataIntel Tiger Lake
Power efficiency1.23no data
Architecture codenameDeneb (2009−2011)Tiger Lake U (2020)
Release date9 February 2009 (15 years ago)1 September 2020 (4 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$174no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Detailed specifications

Phenom II X4 805 and Celeron 6205 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 cores4 (Quad-Core)2 (Dual-core)
Threads42
Base clock speed2.5 GHzno data
Boost clock speed2.5 GHz2/2 GHz
L1 cache128 KB (per core)160 KB
L2 cache512 KB (per core)2.5 MB
L3 cache4 MB (shared)4 MB
Chip lithography45 nm10 nm
Die size258 mm2no data
Number of transistors758 millionno data
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--

Compatibility

Information on Phenom II X4 805 and Celeron 6205 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 configuration1no data
SocketAM3BGA1499
Power consumption (TDP)95 Watt15 Watt

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Phenom II X4 805 and Celeron 6205 are enumerated here.

AMD-V+-

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Phenom II X4 805 and Celeron 6205. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3DDR4

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardOn certain motherboards (Chipset feature)Intel UHD Graphics Xe G4 48EUs

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Phenom II X4 805 and Celeron 6205.

PCIe version2.0no data

Pros & cons summary


Recency 9 February 2009 1 September 2020
Physical cores 4 2
Threads 4 2
Chip lithography 45 nm 10 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 95 Watt 15 Watt

Phenom II X4 805 has 100% more physical cores and 100% more threads.

Celeron 6205, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 11 years, a 350% more advanced lithography process, and 533.3% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between Phenom II X4 805 and Celeron 6205. We've got no test results to judge.

Note that Phenom II X4 805 is a desktop processor while Celeron 6205 is a notebook one.


Should you still have questions on choice between Phenom II X4 805 and Celeron 6205, 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.


AMD Phenom II X4 805
Phenom II X4 805
Intel Celeron 6205
Celeron 6205

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.


3.5 33 votes

Rate Phenom II X4 805 on a scale of 1 to 5:

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

Rate Celeron 6205 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Phenom II X4 805 or Celeron 6205, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.