Select any two CPUs for comparison
VS

Gaming Performance Comparison

Recommended System Requirements
Game Celeron M 925 2.3GHz Athlon Neo X2 Dual Core L325
Cyberpunk 2077 994% 1019%
Hitman 3 1373% 1406%
Assassins Creed: Valhalla 1373% 1406%
Resident Evil 8 1115% 1142%
FIFA 21 923% 946%
Grand Theft Auto VI 1698% 1739%
Call of Duty: Black Ops Cold War 960% 984%
The Medium 1777% 1819%
Genshin Impact 728% 747%
Far Cry 6 1626% 1665%

In terms of overall gaming performance, the Intel Celeron M 925 2.3GHz is marginally better than the AMD Athlon Neo X2 Dual Core L325 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 M 925 was released over a year more recently than the Athlon Neo X2, and so the Celeron M 925 is likely to have better levels of support, and will be more optimized for running the latest games.

The Athlon Neo X2 has 1 more core than the Celeron M 925. However, while the Athlon Neo X2 will probably perform better than the Celeron M 925, both CPUs are likely to struggle with the latest games, and will almost certainly bottleneck high-end graphics cards. Both CPUs also have quite low clock frequencies, which means recent games will have to be played at low settings, assuming you own an equivalently powerful GPU.

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 M 925 and Athlon Neo X2 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 Celeron M 925 has a 0.8 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 Athlon Neo X2 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 Celeron M 925 and the Athlon Neo X2 have the same L2 cache size, and neither CPU appears to have an L3 cache. In this case, the Athlon Neo X2 has a 192 KB bigger L1 cache, so would probably provide better performance than the Celeron M 925, at least 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 Athlon Neo X2 has a 17 Watt lower Maximum TDP than the Celeron M 925. However, the Celeron M 925 was created with a 20 nm smaller manufacturing technology. Overall, by taking both into account, the Celeron M 925 is likely the CPU with the lower heat production and power requirements, by quite a wide margin.

CPU Core Details

CPU CodenamePenrynConesus
MoBo SocketSocket PSocket 812
Notebook CPUyesyes
Release Date09 Jan 201101 Jun 2009
CPU LinkGD LinkGD Link
Approved

CPU Technical Specifications

CPU Cores1vs2
Clock Speed2.3 GHzvs1.5 GHz
Turbo Frequency-vs-
Max TDP35 Wvs18 W
Lithography45 nmvs65 nm
Bit Width-vs-
Virtualization Technologynovsno
Comparison

CPU Cache and Memory

L1 Cache Size64 KBvs256 KB
L2 Cache Size1024 KBvs1024 KB
L2 Cache Speed-vs-
L3 Cache Size-vs-
ECC Memory Supportnovsno
Comparison

CPU Graphics

Graphicsno
Base GPU Frequency-vs-
Max GPU Frequency-vs-
DirectX-vs-
Displays Supported-vs-
Comparison

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 ReviewThe Celeron brand has been used by Intel for several distinct ranges of x86 CPUs targeted at budget personal computers. Celeron processors can run all IA-32 computer programs, but their performance is somewhat lower when compared to similar CPUs with higher-priced Intel CPU brands. For example, the Celeron brand will often have less cache memory, or have advanced features purposely disabled. These missing features have had a variable impact on performance. In some cases, the effect was significant and in other cases the differences were relatively minor. Many of the Celeron designs have achieved a very high bang for the buck, while at other times, the performance difference has been noticeable. This has been the primary justification for the higher cost of other Intel CPU brands versus the Celeron rangeWith 27 mm 27 mm in size and 2.5 mm in thickness, the Athlon Neo processors utilize a new package called "ASB1", essentially a BGA package, for smaller footprint to allow smaller designs for notebooks and lowering the cost. The clock of the processors is significantly lower than desktop and other mobile counterparts to reach a low TDP, at 15W maximum for a single core x86-64 CPU at 1.6 GHz. The Athlon Neo processors are equipped with 512 KB of L2 cache and HyperTransport 1.0 running at 800 MHz frequency.