A6-1450 vs Celeron N2815

A6-1450 vs Celeron N2815 Performance Spectrum

A6-1450

4 / 4

1,062

0.0%

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3955WX

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7955WX

Ryzen Threadripper 3990X

Celeron N2815

2 / 2

1,068

+0.6%

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.

A6-1450 vs Celeron N2815 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.

A6-1450 vs Celeron N2815: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

A6-1450

2013

Why buy it

✅100% more PCIe lanes (8 vs 4) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (1,062 vs 1,068).
❌700% higher power demand at 8W vs 1W.

Celeron N2815

2013

Why buy it

✅Draws 1W instead of 8W, a 7W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Fewer obvious downsides in this matchup outside of normal market pricing swings.

Quick Answers

So, is Celeron N2815 better than A6-1450?

Yes. Celeron N2815 is the better all-around CPU here. It gives you a 1.8% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data and 0.6% better PassMark, which is enough to make it the stronger overall pick.

Which one is better for gaming?

If gaming is the priority, Celeron N2815 is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 1.8% 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, Celeron N2815 is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.6% better PassMark, backed by 2 cores and 2 threads.

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

Celeron N2815 still makes the most sense overall. Celeron N2815 comes in at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it still gives you a 1.8% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data.

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

Celeron N2815 is the safer long-term CPU choice because it gives you more room to grow and a better platform outlook.

A6-1450 vs Celeron N2815 Technical Specifications

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

A6-1450

The A6-1450 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 2014-01-01. It is based on the Temash (2013) architecture. It features 4 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 1 GHz, with boost up to 1.4 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 512K (per core). Built on 32 nm process technology. Socket: FT3. Thermal design power (TDP): 8 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 1,062 points. Launch price was $70.

Celeron N2815

The Celeron N2815 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 1 December 2013 (12 years ago). It is based on the Bay Trail-M (2013−2014) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 1.86 GHz, with boost up to 2.13 GHz. L3 cache: 1 MB. L2 cache: 1 MB. Built on 22 nm process technology. Socket: FCBGA1170. Thermal design power (TDP): 7.5 Watt. Memory support: DDR3L-1066. Passmark benchmark score: 1,068 points. Launch price was $107.

⚡

Processing Power

The A6-1450 packs 4 cores / 4 threads, while the Celeron N2815 offers 2 cores / 2 threads — the A6-1450 has 2 more cores. Boost clocks reach 1.4 GHz on the A6-1450 versus 2.13 GHz on the Celeron N2815 — a 41.4% clock advantage for the Celeron N2815 (base: 1 GHz vs 1.86 GHz). The A6-1450 uses the Temash (2013) architecture (32 nm), while the Celeron N2815 uses Bay Trail-M (2013−2014) (22 nm). In PassMark, the A6-1450 scores 1,062 against the Celeron N2815's 1,068 — a 0.6% lead for the Celeron N2815. L3 cache: 0 kB on the A6-1450 vs 1 MB on the Celeron N2815.

Feature	A6-1450	Celeron N2815
Cores / Threads	4 / 4+100%	2 / 2
Boost Clock	1.4 GHz	2.13 GHz+52%
Base Clock	1 GHz	1.86 GHz+86%
L3 Cache	0 kB	1 MB
L2 Cache	512K (per core)+51100%	1 MB
Process	32 nm	22 nm-31%
Architecture	Temash (2013)	Bay Trail-M (2013−2014)
PassMark	1,062	1,068
Geekbench 6 Single	144	—
Geekbench 6 Multi	450	—

🧠

Memory & Platform

The A6-1450 uses the FT3 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Celeron N2815 uses FCBGA1170 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Both support up to DDR3L-1066 memory speed. Both support up to 8 GB of RAM. Memory channels: 1 (A6-1450) vs 2 (Celeron N2815). PCIe lanes: 8 (A6-1450) vs 4 (Celeron N2815) — the A6-1450 offers 4 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: SoC (A6-1450) and FCBGA1170 (Celeron N2815).

Feature	A6-1450	Celeron N2815
Socket	FT3	FCBGA1170
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0+50%	PCIe 2.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR3L-1066	1066
Max RAM Capacity	8 GB	8 GB
RAM Channels	1	2+100%
ECC Support	No	No
PCIe Lanes	8+100%	4

🔧

Advanced Features

Neither processor supports overclocking. Virtualization support: AMD-V (A6-1450) vs true (Celeron N2815). Both include integrated graphics — Radeon HD 8250 (A6-1450) and Intel HD Graphics (Bay Trail) (Celeron N2815) — useful as a fallback for troubleshooting or display output without a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: A6-1450 targets Low Power Tablet/Laptop. Direct competitor: A6-1450 rivals Atom Z3740; Celeron N2815 rivals AMD A4-1250.

Feature	A6-1450	Celeron N2815
Integrated GPU	Yes	Yes
IGPU Model	Radeon HD 8250	Intel HD Graphics (Bay Trail)
Unlocked	No	No
AVX-512	No	No
Virtualization	AMD-V	true
Target Use	Low Power Tablet/Laptop	—