Select any two CPUs for comparison
VS

Gaming Performance Comparison

Recommended System Requirements
Game Celeron Dual-Core 867 1.3GHz Athlon II P360 Dual-Core
Cyberpunk 2077 608% 611%
Assassins Creed: Valhalla 854% 857%
Call of Duty: Black Ops Cold War 587% 589%
FIFA 21 563% 565%
Watch Dogs Legion 854% 857%
Microsoft Flight Simulator 703% 705%
World of Warcraft: Shadowlands 1001% 1005%
Grand Theft Auto VI 1064% 1068%
Godfall 1268% 1273%
Genshin Impact 436% 438%

In terms of overall gaming performance, the Intel Celeron Dual-Core 867 1.3GHz is marginally better than the AMD Athlon II P360 Dual-Core when it comes to running the latest games. This also means it will be less likely to bottleneck more powerful GPUs, allowing them to achieve more of their gaming performance potential.

The Celeron Dual-Core 867 was released less than a year after the Athlon II P360, and so they are likely to have similar levels of support, and similarly optimized performance when running the latest games.

The Celeron Dual-Core 867 and the Athlon II P360 both have 2 cores, and so are quite likely to struggle with the latest games, or at least bottleneck high-end graphics cards when running them. With a decent accompanying GPU, the Celeron Dual-Core 867 and the Athlon II P360 may still be able to run slightly older games fairly effectively.

More important for gaming than the number of cores and threads is the clock rate. Problematically, unless the two CPUs are from the same family, this can only serve as a general guide and nothing like an exact comparison, because the clock cycles per instruction (CPI) will vary so much.

The Celeron Dual-Core 867 and Athlon II P360 are not from the same family of CPUs, so their clock speeds are by no means directly comparable. Bear in mind, then, that while the Athlon II P360 has a 1 GHz faster frequency, this is not always an indicator that it will be superior in performance, despite frequency being crucial when trying to avoid GPU bottlenecking. In this case, however, the difference is probably a good indicator that the is superior.

Aside from the clock rate, the next-most important CPU features for PC game performance are L2 and L3 cache size. Faster than RAM, the more cache available, the more data that can be stored for lightning-fast retrieval. L1 Cache is not usually an issue anymore for gaming, with most high-end CPUs eking out about the same L1 performance, and L2 is more important than L3 - but L3 is still important if you want to reach the highest levels of performance. Bear in mind that although it is better to have a larger cache, the larger it is, the higher the latency, so a balance has to be struck.

The Athlon II P360 has a 512 KB bigger L2 cache than the Celeron Dual-Core 867, and although the Athlon II P360 does not appear to have an L3 cache, its larger L2 cache means that it wins out in this area.

The maximum Thermal Design Power is the power in Watts that the CPU will consume in the worst case scenario. The lithography is the semiconductor manufacturing technology being used to create the CPU - the smaller this is, the more transistors that can be fit into the CPU, and the closer the connections. For both the lithography and the TDP, it is the lower the better, because a lower number means a lower amount of power is necessary to run the CPU, and consequently a lower amount of heat is produced.

The Celeron Dual-Core 867 has a 8 Watt lower Maximum TDP than the Athlon II P360, and was created with a 13 nm smaller manufacturing technology. What this means is the Celeron Dual-Core 867 will consume slightly less power and consequently produce less heat, enabling more prolonged computational tasks with fewer adverse effects. This will lower your yearly electricity bill slightly, as well as prevent you from having to invest in extra cooling mechanisms (unless you overclock).

CPU Core Details

CPU CodenameSandy BridgeChamplain
MoBo SocketBGA 1023Socket S1g4
Notebook CPUyesyes
Release Date01 Jan 201204 Jan 2011
CPU LinkGD LinkGD Link
Approved

CPU Technical Specifications

CPU Cores2vs2
Clock Speed1.3 GHzvs2.3 GHz
Turbo Frequency-vs-
Max TDP17 Wvs25 W
Lithography32 nmvs45 nm
Bit Width-vs-
Virtualization Technologynovsno
Comparison

CPU Cache and Memory

L1 Cache Size128 KBvs256 KB
L2 Cache Size512 KBvs1024 KB
L3 Cache Size2 MBvs-
ECC Memory Supportnovsno
Comparison

CPU Graphics

Graphicsnono

CPU Package and Version Specifications

Package Size-vs-
Revision-vs-
PCIe Revision-vs-
PCIe Configurations-vs-

Gaming Performance Value

Performance Value

CPU Mini Review

Mini ReviewSandy Bridge is the codename for a microarchitecture developed by Intel beginning in 2005 for central processing units in computers to replace the Nehalem microarchitecture. Intel demonstrated a Sandy Bridge processor in 2009, and released first products based on the architecture in January 2011 under the Core brand.Turion 64 X2 is AMD's 64-bit dual-core mobile CPU, intended to compete with Intel's Core and Core 2 CPUs. The Turion 64 X2 was launched on May 17, 2006, after several delays. These processors use Socket S1, and feature DDR2 memory. They also include AMD Virtualization Technology and more power-saving features. AMD first produced the Turion 64 X2 on IBM's 90 nm Silicon on insulator (SOI) process (cores with the Taylor codename). As of May 2007, they have switched to a 65 nm Silicon-Germanium stressed process[citation needed], which was recently achieved through the combined effort of IBM and AMD, with 40% improvement over comparable 65 nm processes[citation needed]. The earlier 90 nm devices were codenamed Taylor and Trinidad, while the newer 65 nm cores have codename Tyler.