Intel Celeron N3050 vs AMD Athlon 64 X2 3250e |
Released January, 2015
Intel Celeron N3050
- 1.6 GHz
- Dual core
Reasons to buy the Intel Celeron N3050
 | Much newer manufacturing process 14 nm | | Significantly more l2 cache 2 MB |
| | Much lower typical power consumption 4.88W | | Much better performance per watt 8.65 pt/W |
VS
Released November, 2008
AMD Athlon 64 X2 3250e
- 1.5 GHz
- Dual core
Reasons to buy the AMD Athlon 64 X2 3250e
| | Better overclocked clock speed (Air) 2.48 GHz |
Cast your vote Do you agree or disagree with CPUBoss?
VS
Differences What are the advantages of each
| |||||||
| Much newer manufacturing process | 14 nm | vs | 65 nm | A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running processor | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Significantly more l2 cache | 2 MB | vs | 1 MB | 2x more l2 cache; more data can be stored in the l2 cache for quick access later | |||
| Much lower typical power consumption | 4.88W | vs | 97.88W | 20.1x lower typical power consumption | |||
| Much better performance per watt | 8.65 pt/W | vs | 0.32 pt/W | Around 27x better performance per watt | |||
| Much more l2 cache per core | 1 MB/core | vs | 0.5 MB/core | 2x more l2 cache per core | |||
| Newer | Jan, 2015 | vs | Nov, 2008 | Release date over 6 years later | |||
| Much lower annual home energy cost | 1.45 $/year | vs | 40.46 $/year | 28x lower annual home energy cost | |||
| Much lower annual commercial energy cost | 5.26 $/year | vs | 89.18 $/year | 17x lower annual commercial energy cost | |||
| Slightly better geekbench 3 AES single core score | 350.4 MB/s | vs | 41.1 MB/s | More than 8.5x better geekbench 3 AES single core score | |||
| |||||||
| Better overclocked clock speed (Air) | 2.48 GHz | vs | 2.14 GHz | More than 15% better overclocked clock speed (Air) | |||
Report a correction
Benchmarks Real world tests of Celeron N3050 vs Athlon 64 X2 3250e
GeekBench 3 (Multi-core) Data courtesy Primate Labs
GeekBench 3 (Single core) Data courtesy Primate Labs
GeekBench 3 (AES single core) Data courtesy Primate Labs
PassMark Data courtesy Passmark
PassMark (Single Core)
Specifications Full list of technical specs
summary | Celeron N3050 | vs | Athlon 64 X2 3250e |
|---|---|---|---|
| Clock speed | 1.6 GHz | 1.5 GHz | |
| Cores | Dual core | Dual core | |
features | |||
| Has a NX bit | Yes | Yes | |
| Has virtualization support | Yes | Yes | |
| Instruction set extensions | |||
| SSE2 | |||
| MMX | |||
| SSE3 | |||
| SSE | |||
| 3DNow! | |||
| AES | |||
| Supports dynamic frequency scaling | Yes | Yes | |
details | Celeron N3050 | vs | Athlon 64 X2 3250e |
|---|---|---|---|
| Threads | 2 | 2 | |
| L2 cache | 2 MB | 1 MB | |
| L2 cache per core | 1 MB/core | 0.5 MB/core | |
| Manufacture process | 14 nm | 65 nm | |
| Max CPUs | 1 | 1 | |
overclocking | |||
| Overclocked clock speed | 2.14 GHz | 2.48 GHz | |
| Overclocked clock speed (Water) | 1.6 GHz | 1.5 GHz | |
| Overclocked clock speed (Air) | 2.14 GHz | 2.48 GHz | |
power consumption | |||
| TDP | 6W | 22W | |
| Annual home energy cost | 1.45 $/year | 40.46 $/year | |
| Annual commercial energy cost | 5.26 $/year | 89.18 $/year | |
| Performance per watt | 8.65 pt/W | 0.32 pt/W | |
| Typical power consumption | 4.88W | 97.88W | |
 Intel Celeron N3050  Report a correction |  AMD Athlon 64 X2 3250e Report a correction |
Follow us
Compare
Related Comparisons
 | VS |  |
| $107 | $107 | |
| N2840 vs N3050 | ||
 | VS | |
| $161 | $107 | |
| N3700 vs N3050 | ||
 | VS | |
| $275 | $107 | |
| 4005U vs N3050 | ||
 | VS | |
| $17 | $107 | |
| Z3735F vs N3050 | ||
 | VS | |
| $21 | $107 | |
| x5-Z8300 vs N3050 | ||
 | VS | |
| $107 | ||
| N3060 vs N3050 | ||
 | VS | |
| $161 | $107 | |
| N3540 vs N3050 | ||
Popular Comparisons
 | VS |  |
| $300 | $305 | |
| 2500 vs W3520 | ||
 | VS |  |
| $350 | $272 | |
| 6700K vs 4790K | ||
 | VS |  |
| $281 | ||
| 6410 vs 4200U | ||
 | VS |  |
| $281 | ||
| 7th Gen A9-9410 vs 6200U | ||
| | VS | |
| $161 | $275 | |
| N3540 vs 4005U | ||
 | VS |  |
| $225 | $134 | |
| 3217U vs 847 | ||
 | VS |  |
| $180 | ||
| 5200 vs 3470 | ||
