Atom D2550 vs Celeron N3000

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.

Atom D2550 vs Celeron N3000 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.

Atom D2550 vs Celeron N3000: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

Atom D2550

2011

Why buy it

✅+1.4% higher PassMark.

Trade-offs

❌400% higher power demand at 10W vs 2W.

Celeron N3000

2015

Why buy it

✅Draws 2W instead of 10W, a 8W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (705 vs 715).

Quick Answers

So, is Celeron N3000 better than Atom D2550?

It depends on what you want from the system. For gaming, Celeron N3000 is ahead with a 0.1% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. For rendering, compiling, streaming, and heavier multitasking, Atom D2550 pulls ahead with 1.4% better PassMark.

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Atom D2550 is the stronger fit. You are getting 1.4% better PassMark, backed by 2 cores and 4 threads.

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

Celeron N3000 still makes the most sense overall. Celeron N3000 comes in at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it still gives you a 0.1% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data.

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

Celeron N3000 makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2015 vs 2011). That makes it the safer long-term bet.

Atom D2550 vs Celeron N3000 Technical Specifications

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

Atom D2550

The Atom D2550 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 1 November 2011 (14 years ago). It is based on the Cedarview (2011−2012) architecture. It features 2 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 1.86 GHz, with boost up to 1.87 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 512K (per core). Built on 32 nm process technology. Socket: FCBGA559. Thermal design power (TDP): 10 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 715 points. Launch price was $69.

Celeron N3000

The Celeron N3000 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 1 April 2015 (10 years ago). It is based on the Braswell (2015−2016) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 1.04 GHz, with boost up to 2.08 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 1 MB. Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: FCBGA1170. Thermal design power (TDP): 4 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 705 points. Launch price was $107.

⚡

Processing Power

The Atom D2550 packs 2 cores / 4 threads, matching the Celeron N3000's 2 cores. Boost clocks reach 1.87 GHz on the Atom D2550 versus 2.08 GHz on the Celeron N3000 — a 10.6% clock advantage for the Celeron N3000 (base: 1.86 GHz vs 1.04 GHz). The Atom D2550 uses the Cedarview (2011−2012) architecture (32 nm), while the Celeron N3000 uses Braswell (2015−2016) (14 nm). In PassMark, the Atom D2550 scores 715 against the Celeron N3000's 705 — a 1.4% lead for the Atom D2550. Both processors carry 0 kB of L3 cache.

Feature	Atom D2550	Celeron N3000
Cores / Threads	2 / 4	2 / 2
Boost Clock	1.87 GHz	2.08 GHz+11%
Base Clock	1.86 GHz+79%	1.04 GHz
L3 Cache	0 kB	0 kB
L2 Cache	512K (per core)+51100%	1 MB
Process	32 nm	14 nm-56%
Architecture	Cedarview (2011−2012)	Braswell (2015−2016)
PassMark	715+1%	705
Geekbench 6 Single	—	160
Geekbench 6 Multi	—	290

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Atom D2550 uses the FCBGA559 socket (PCIe 2.0), while the Celeron N3000 uses FCBGA1170 (PCIe 3.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR3-1066 on the Atom D2550 versus DDR3L-1600 on the Celeron N3000 — the Celeron N3000 supports 50.1% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The Celeron N3000 supports up to 8 GB of RAM compared to 4 GB — 100% more capacity for professional workloads. Memory channels: 1 (Atom D2550) vs 2 (Celeron N3000). Both provide 4 PCIe lanes. Chipset compatibility: Intel FCBGA559 (Atom D2550) and SoC (Celeron N3000).

Feature	Atom D2550	Celeron N3000
Socket	FCBGA559	FCBGA1170
PCIe Generation	PCIe 2.0	PCIe 3.0+50%
Max RAM Speed	DDR3-1066	DDR3L-1600+50%
Max RAM Capacity	4 GB	8 GB+100%
RAM Channels	1	2+100%
ECC Support	No	No
PCIe Lanes	4	4

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization: not specified (Atom D2550) / VT-x, VT-d (Celeron N3000). Both include integrated graphics — Intel GMA 3650 (Atom D2550) and Intel HD Graphics 400 (Celeron N3000) — useful as a fallback for troubleshooting or display output without a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Celeron N3000 targets Budget Laptop. Direct competitor: Celeron N3000 rivals AMD E2-7110.