Atom E3825 vs Celeron SU2300

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 E3825 vs Celeron SU2300 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 E3825 vs Celeron SU2300: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

Atom E3825

2013

Why buy it

✅Draws 6W instead of 10W, a 4W reduction.
✅100+% more PCIe lanes (4 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with Intel HD Graphics (Bay Trail), while Celeron SU2300 needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Celeron SU2300 across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (525 vs 545).

Celeron SU2300

2009

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +7.6% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.

Trade-offs

❌Launch MSRP is still $134 MSRP, while Atom E3825 mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
❌66.7% higher power demand at 10W vs 6W.
❌No integrated graphics, while Atom E3825 can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Quick Answers

So, is Celeron SU2300 better than Atom E3825?

Yes. Celeron SU2300 is the better all-around CPU here. It gives you a 7.6% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data and 3.8% better PassMark, which is enough to make it the stronger overall pick.

Which one is better for gaming?

If gaming is the priority, Celeron SU2300 is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 7.6% 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 SU2300 is the stronger fit. You are getting 3.8% better PassMark.

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

Celeron SU2300 is the better buy right now. Celeron SU2300 comes in at an unclear MSRP at $134 MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it still gives you a 7.6% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. It is also 100.0% better value on MSRP (4.1 vs 0.0 PassMark/$), so you are getting the faster CPU without taking a value hit on paper.

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

Atom E3825 makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2013 vs 2009). That makes it the safer long-term bet.

Atom E3825 vs Celeron SU2300 Technical Specifications

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

Atom E3825

The Atom E3825 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 8 October 2013 (12 years ago). It is based on the Bay Trail-I (2013) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Max frequency: 1.33 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 512 kB (per core). Built on 22 nm process technology. Socket: FCBGA1170. Thermal design power (TDP): 6 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 525 points. Launch price was $73.

Celeron SU2300

The Celeron SU2300 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 2007-01-01. Base frequency: 1.2 GHz. L3 cache: 1 MB. Built on 45 nm process technology. Socket: BGA956. Thermal design power (TDP): 10 Watt. Passmark benchmark score: 545 points. Launch price was $69.

⚡

Processing Power

The Atom E3825 is built on the Bay Trail-I (2013) architecture. In PassMark, the Atom E3825 scores 525 against the Celeron SU2300's 545 — a 3.7% lead for the Celeron SU2300. L3 cache: 0 kB on the Atom E3825 vs 1 MB on the Celeron SU2300.

Feature	Atom E3825	Celeron SU2300
Cores / Threads	2 / 2	—
Boost Clock	1.33 GHz	—
Base Clock	—	1.2 GHz
L3 Cache	0 kB	1 MB
L2 Cache	512 kB (per core)	—
Process	22 nm-51%	45 nm
Architecture	Bay Trail-I (2013)	—
PassMark	525	545+4%

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Atom E3825 uses the FCBGA1170 socket (PCIe 2.0), while the Celeron SU2300 uses BGA956 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.