3015Ce vs Celeron B810

CPU

GPU

3015Ce

2 Cores4 Thrd1 WWMax: 2.3 GHz2020

Similar parts

·······

Buy on Amazon

Celeron B810

2 Cores2 Thrd0 WWMax: 1.6 GHz2011

Buy on Amazon

3015Ce vs Celeron B810 Performance Spectrum

3015Ce

2 / 4

2,099

+0.4%

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7955WX

Ryzen Threadripper 3990X

Celeron B810

2 / 2

2,091

0.0%

About PassMark

PassMark CPU Mark evaluates processor speed through complex mathematical computations. It provides a reliable metric to compare multi-core performance, where higher scores indicate faster processing for multitasking, gaming, and heavy workloads.

3015Ce vs Celeron B810 FPS Benchmarks

Predicted gaming performance across popular games. Tested paired with GeForce RTX 5090 to isolate CPU performance.

Search any supported game below to compare 1080p FPS for both components.

3015Ce vs Celeron B810: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

See where each CPU makes more sense in practice: gaming, heavier work, platform cost, power draw, and upgrade path.

3015Ce

2020

Why buy it

✅+100% larger total L3 cache (4 MB vs 2 MB).

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 14.0 vs 24.3 PassMark/$ ($150 MSRP vs $86 MSRP).

Celeron B810

2011

Why buy it

✅Costs $64 less on MSRP ($86 MSRP vs $150 MSRP).
✅Delivers 73.8% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 24.3 vs 14.0 PassMark/$ ($86 MSRP vs $150 MSRP).
✅100% more PCIe lanes (16 vs 8) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (2,091 vs 2,099).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (2 MB vs 4 MB).

Quick Answers

So, is 3015Ce better than Celeron B810?

Yes. 3015Ce is the better all-around CPU here. It gives you a 0.3% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data, 0.4% better PassMark, and the stronger long-term platform, which is enough to make it the stronger overall pick.

Which one is better for gaming?

If gaming is the priority, 3015Ce is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 0.3% more average FPS across 50 shared CPU game tests.

Which one is better for streaming, content creation, and heavy multitasking?

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, 3015Ce is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.4% better PassMark, backed by 2 cores and 4 threads. It also has the larger cache pool with 100% larger total L3 cache (4 MB vs 2 MB).

Which one is the smarter buy today, not just the cheaper CPU?

3015Ce is still the much better call for a fresh build. 3015Ce comes in 74.4% more expensive on MSRP at $150 MSRP versus $86 MSRP, and it still gives you a 0.3% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. Celeron B810 only looks stronger on raw value math because it is extremely cheap, but that usually means used-market pricing on an obsolete 2011 platform. Even with 73.8% better value on paper (24.3 vs 14.0 PassMark/$), it really only makes sense as a cheap stopgap or a niche existing-platform option for someone already on PGA988.

Which one is more future-proof for 2026 and beyond?

3015Ce makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2020 vs 2011), 100% larger total L3 cache (4 MB vs 2 MB), and more multi-core headroom with 2 cores / 4 threads instead of 2/2. That extra compute headroom is more likely to matter as games, background tasks, and creator workloads get heavier.

3015Ce vs Celeron B810 Technical Specifications

Side-by-side specs, architecture details, clocks, memory, power, and platform differences.

3015Ce

The 3015Ce is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 2014-01-01. It is based on the Pollock (Zen) (2020) architecture. It features 2 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 1.2 GHz, with boost up to 2.3 GHz. L3 cache: 4 MB. L2 cache: 1 MB. Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: FT5. Thermal design power (TDP): 1 MB + 4 MB. Memory support: DDR4. Passmark benchmark score: 2,099 points. Launch price was $50.

Celeron B810

The Celeron B810 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 1 March 2011 (14 years ago). It is based on the Sandy Bridge (2011−2013) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 1.6 GHz, with boost up to 1.6 GHz. L3 cache: 2 MB (total). L2 cache: 256K (per core). Built on 32 nm process technology. Socket: PGA988. Thermal design power (TDP): 35 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 2,091 points. Launch price was $86.

⚡

Processing Power

The 3015Ce packs 2 cores / 4 threads, matching the Celeron B810's 2 cores. Boost clocks reach 2.3 GHz on the 3015Ce versus 1.6 GHz on the Celeron B810 — a 35.9% clock advantage for the 3015Ce (base: 1.2 GHz vs 1.6 GHz). The 3015Ce uses the Pollock (Zen) (2020) architecture (14 nm), while the Celeron B810 uses Sandy Bridge (2011−2013) (32 nm). In PassMark, the 3015Ce scores 2,099 against the Celeron B810's 2,091 — a 0.4% lead for the 3015Ce. L3 cache: 4 MB on the 3015Ce vs 2 MB (total) on the Celeron B810.

Feature	3015Ce	Celeron B810
Cores / Threads	2 / 4	2 / 2
Boost Clock	2.3 GHz+44%	1.6 GHz
Base Clock	1.2 GHz	1.6 GHz+33%
L3 Cache	4 MB+100%	2 MB (total)
L2 Cache	1 MB	256K (per core)+25500%
Process	14 nm-56%	32 nm
Architecture	Pollock (Zen) (2020)	Sandy Bridge (2011−2013)
PassMark	2,099	2,091

🧠

Memory & Platform

The 3015Ce uses the FT5 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Celeron B810 uses PGA988 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches 1600 on the 3015Ce versus DDR3-1333 on the Celeron B810 — the 3015Ce supports 20% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. Both support up to 16 GB of RAM. Memory channels: 1 (3015Ce) vs 2 (Celeron B810). PCIe lanes: 8 (3015Ce) vs 16 (Celeron B810) — the Celeron B810 offers 8 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: FP5 (3015Ce) and HM65,HM67,QM67,QM77 (Celeron B810).

Feature	3015Ce	Celeron B810
Socket	FT5	PGA988
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0+50%	PCIe 2.0
Max RAM Speed	1600+20%	DDR3-1333
Max RAM Capacity	16 GB	16 GB
RAM Channels	1	2+100%
ECC Support	No	No
PCIe Lanes	8	16+100%

🔧

Advanced Features

Neither processor supports overclocking. Virtualization support: true (3015Ce) vs VT-x (Celeron B810). Both include integrated graphics — Radeon Graphics (2-Core) (3015Ce) and HD Graphics (Sandy Bridge) (Celeron B810) — useful as a fallback for troubleshooting or display output without a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Celeron B810 targets Budget. Direct competitor: 3015Ce rivals Celeron N4020; Celeron B810 rivals Pentium 967.

Feature	3015Ce	Celeron B810
Integrated GPU	Yes	Yes
IGPU Model	Radeon Graphics (2-Core)	HD Graphics (Sandy Bridge)
Unlocked	No	No
AVX-512	No	No
Virtualization	true	VT-x
Target Use	—	Budget

💰

Value Analysis

At launch, the 3015Ce was priced at $150, while the Celeron B810 came in at $86. On launch pricing ($150 vs $86), Celeron B810 was $64 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the 3015Ce delivers 14.0 pts/$ vs 24.3 pts/$ for the Celeron B810 — making the Celeron B810 the 53.9% better value option.

Feature	3015Ce	Celeron B810
MSRP	$150	$86-43%
Performance per Dollar	14.0	24.3+74%
Release Date	2020	2011

Search 3015Ce on Amazon

Search Celeron B810 on Amazon

Affiliate Disclosure

ChipVERSUS is a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to Amazon.com. We may earn a commission on qualifying purchases made through our links. This comes at no additional cost to you and helps support our work in providing comprehensive PC building guides and tools.

Amazon and the Amazon logo are trademarks of Amazon.com, Inc. or its affiliates.