
Athlon II X2 210e

Celeron 3215U
Athlon II X2 210e vs Celeron 3215U Performance Spectrum
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.
Athlon II X2 210e vs Celeron 3215U 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.

Path of Exile 2

Counter-Strike 2

League of Legends

Valorant

Among Us

Apex Legends

ARC Raiders

Baldur's Gate 3

Call of Duty: Black Ops 6
Athlon II X2 210e vs Celeron 3215U: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict
See where each CPU makes more sense in practice: gaming, heavier work, platform cost, power draw, and upgrade path.
Athlon II X2 210e
2010Why buy it
- β Draws 45W instead of 512W, a 467W reduction.
- β Includes a boxed cooler (true), unlike Celeron 3215U.
Trade-offs
- βLower PassMark (1,089 vs 1,091).
- βLaunch MSRP is still $60 MSRP, while Celeron 3215U mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
- βNo integrated graphics, while Celeron 3215U can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.
Celeron 3215U
2015Why buy it
- β +0.2% higher PassMark.
- β 100+% more PCIe lanes (12 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
- β Integrated graphics onboard with HD Graphics (Broadwell), while Athlon II X2 210e needs a discrete GPU.
Trade-offs
- β1037.8% higher power demand at 512W vs 45W.
- βNo boxed cooler included, unlike Athlon II X2 210e.
Quick Answers
So, is Athlon II X2 210e better than Celeron 3215U?
Which one is better for streaming, content creation, and heavy multitasking?
Which one is the smarter buy today, not just the cheaper CPU?
Which one is more future-proof for 2026 and beyond?
Athlon II X2 210e vs Celeron 3215U Technical Specifications
Side-by-side specs, architecture details, clocks, memory, power, and platform differences.

Athlon II X2 210e
The Athlon II X2 210e is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 2009-01-01. It is based on the Regor (2009β2013) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 2.6 GHz, with boost up to 2.6 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 512 kB. Built on 45 nm process technology. Socket: AM3. Thermal design power (TDP): 45 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 1,089 points. Launch price was $149.

Celeron 3215U
The Celeron 3215U is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 1 June 2015 (10 years ago). It is based on the Broadwell (2015β2019) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 1.7 GHz, with boost up to 1.7 GHz. L3 cache: 2 MB. L2 cache: 512 kB. Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: FCBGA1168. Thermal design power (TDP): 15 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 1,091 points. Launch price was $107.
Processing Power
Both the Athlon II X2 210e and Celeron 3215U share an identical 2-core/2-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 2.6 GHz on the Athlon II X2 210e versus 1.7 GHz on the Celeron 3215U β a 41.9% clock advantage for the Athlon II X2 210e (base: 2.6 GHz vs 1.7 GHz). The Athlon II X2 210e uses the Regor (2009β2013) architecture (45 nm), while the Celeron 3215U uses Broadwell (2015β2019) (14 nm). In PassMark, the Athlon II X2 210e scores 1,089 against the Celeron 3215U's 1,091 β a 0.2% lead for the Celeron 3215U. L3 cache: 0 kB on the Athlon II X2 210e vs 2 MB on the Celeron 3215U.
| Feature | Athlon II X2 210e | Celeron 3215U |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 2 / 2 | 2 / 2 |
| Boost Clock | 2.6 GHz+53% | 1.7 GHz |
| Base Clock | 2.6 GHz+53% | 1.7 GHz |
| L3 Cache | 0 kB | 2 MB |
| L2 Cache | 512 kB | 512 kB |
| Process | 45 nm | 14 nm-69% |
| Architecture | Regor (2009β2013) | Broadwell (2015β2019) |
| PassMark | 1,089 | 1,091 |
| Geekbench 6 Single | β | 339 |
Memory & Platform
The Athlon II X2 210e uses the AM3 socket (PCIe 2.0), while the Celeron 3215U uses FCBGA1168 (PCIe 3.0) β making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches 1333 on the Athlon II X2 210e versus DDR3L-1600 on the Celeron 3215U β the Celeron 3215U supports 20% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. Both support up to 16 GB of RAM. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. PCIe lanes: 0 (Athlon II X2 210e) vs 12 (Celeron 3215U) β the Celeron 3215U offers 12 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: AM2+,AM3 (Athlon II X2 210e) and Wildcat Point-LP (Celeron 3215U).
| Feature | Athlon II X2 210e | Celeron 3215U |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | AM3 | FCBGA1168 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 2.0 | PCIe 3.0+50% |
| Max RAM Speed | 1333 | DDR3L-1600+20% |
| Max RAM Capacity | 16 GB | 16 GB |
| RAM Channels | 2 | 2 |
| ECC Support | No | No |
| PCIe Lanes | 0 | 12 |
Advanced Features
Neither processor supports overclocking. Virtualization support: true (Athlon II X2 210e) vs VT-x, VT-d (Celeron 3215U). The Celeron 3215U includes integrated graphics (HD Graphics (Broadwell)), while the Athlon II X2 210e requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Celeron 3215U targets Budget. Direct competitor: Athlon II X2 210e rivals Pentium E5300; Celeron 3215U rivals Pentium 3825U.
| Feature | Athlon II X2 210e | Celeron 3215U |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | No | Yes |
| IGPU Model | None | HD Graphics (Broadwell) |
| Unlocked | No | No |
| AVX-512 | No | No |
| Virtualization | true | VT-x, VT-d |
| Target Use | β | Budget |
Top Performing CPUs
The most powerful cpus ranked by PassMark CPU Mark benchmark scores.















