Atom E3826 vs Celeron U3400

Atom E3826

2 Cores2 Thrd7 WWMax: 1.47 GHz2013

Celeron U3400

2 Cores2 Thrd18 WWMax: 0.07 GHz2010

Performance Spectrum - CPU

Atom E3826

2 / 2

545

0.0%

575

+5.5%

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.

Value Upgrade Path

This is the official ChipVERSUS Value Rating, comparing raw performance (PassMark) per dollar. Components placed above yours deliver better value for money. The Atom E3826 is positioned at rank 922 and the Celeron U3400 is on rank 1172, so the Atom E3826 offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.

MSRP is the manufacturer's suggested retail price.•
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.

Performance Per Dollar Atom E3826

#910

Atom x5-Z8300

MSRP: $20|Avg: N/A

1615%

#911

Atom Z3735G

MSRP: $17|Avg: N/A

1591%

#912

Core i5-480M

MSRP: $81|Avg: $77

1461%

#913

Core i5-460M

MSRP: $80|Avg: $129

1454%

#914

Core i5-2540M

MSRP: $266|Avg: $10

1441%

#916

Core i5-450M

MSRP: $32|Avg: $31

1391%

#917

Core i3-380M

MSRP: $49|Avg: $25

1334%

#918

Core i5-430M

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $33

1332%

#919

Core 2 Duo T6600

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $4

1296%

#922

Atom E3826

MSRP: N/A|Avg: N/A

100%

#923

Athlon II N370

MSRP: $60|Avg: $10

100%

#928

A8-6410

MSRP: $100|Avg: $40

98%

#933

Athlon X2 L310

MSRP: $100|Avg: $20

96%

Based on actual market prices and performance synthetic scores.

Performance Per Dollar Celeron U3400

#1160

Atom x5-Z8300

MSRP: $20|Avg: N/A

4386%

#1161

Atom Z3735G

MSRP: $17|Avg: N/A

4321%

#1162

Core i5-480M

MSRP: $81|Avg: $77

3967%

#1163

Core i5-460M

MSRP: $80|Avg: $129

3949%

#1164

Core i5-2540M

MSRP: $266|Avg: $10

3913%

#1166

Core i5-450M

MSRP: $32|Avg: $31

3779%

#1167

Core i3-380M

MSRP: $49|Avg: $25

3623%

#1168

Core i5-430M

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $33

3617%

#1169

Core 2 Duo T6600

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $4

3520%

#1172

Celeron U3400

MSRP: $86|Avg: $5

100%

#1173

Celeron T1600

MSRP: $107|Avg: $15

100%

#1174

Pro A12-8800B

MSRP: $400|Avg: $40

100%

#1176

Core i7-2637M

MSRP: $289|Avg: N/A

98%

#1177

Athlon PRO 3045B

MSRP: $426|Avg: $180

97%

#1178

Core 2 Duo SL9600

MSRP: $316|Avg: N/A

97%

#1179

Core 2 Duo T5600

MSRP: $241|Avg: N/A

97%

#1180

Pentium N3510

MSRP: $161|Avg: $161

97%

#1181

Core i7-7Y75

MSRP: $393|Avg: $285

96%

#1183

Core i7-4500U

MSRP: $398|Avg: N/A

94%

#1185

Athlon Neo X2 L325

MSRP: $100|Avg: $5

92%

#1186

Core i3-2370M

MSRP: $225|Avg: N/A

91%

#1187

Core i3-3217UE

MSRP: $225|Avg: $35

90%

Based on actual market prices and performance synthetic scores.

Performance Comparison

About PassMark

🏆 Chipversus Verdict

🚀 Performance Leadership

Performance Trade-off: The Atom E3826 leads in gaming performance. However, the Celeron U3400 is the stronger candidate for professional workloads, offering 5.4% greater multi-core processing power.

Insight	Atom E3826	Celeron U3400
Gaming	✅ Superior gaming performance	❌ Lower gaming performance
Workstation	❌ Weaker in multi-core tasks	✅ Better multi-core power
Price	✅ More affordable ($0)	⚠️ Higher cost ($5)
Longevity	🛑 Legacy (Bay Trail-I (2013) / 22 nm)	🛑 Legacy (Westmere (2010−2011) / 32 nm)

💎 Value Proposition

Insight	Atom E3826	Celeron U3400
Cost Efficiency	❌ Lower cost efficiency	❌ Lower cost efficiency
Upfront Cost	✅ More affordable ($0)	⚠️ Higher cost ($5)

Performance Check

Paired with RTX 4090

To accurately isolate CPU performance, all benchmarks below use an NVIDIA RTX 4090 as the reference GPU. This eliminates GPU-side bottlenecks and highlights pure processing throughput differences between the CPUs.

Note: Real-world results may vary based on your actual GPU. CPU performance impact is more visible in processing-intensive titles and high-refresh-rate gaming scenarios.

Atom E3826 Benchmark Check

Celeron U3400 Benchmark Check

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of Atom E3826 and Celeron U3400

Atom E3826

The Atom E3826 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: 1.47 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 512 kB (per core). Built on 22 nm process technology. Socket: FCBGA1170. Thermal design power (TDP): 7 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 545 points. Launch price was $69.

Celeron U3400

The Celeron U3400 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 2007-01-01. It is based on the Westmere (2010−2011) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 1.06 GHz, with boost up to 0.07 GHz. L3 cache: 2 MB. L2 cache: 512 kB. Built on 32 nm process technology. Socket: BGA1288. Thermal design power (TDP): 18 Watt. Memory support: DDR3-800. Passmark benchmark score: 575 points. Launch price was $69.

⚡

Processing Power

Both the Atom E3826 and Celeron U3400 share an identical 2-core/2-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 1.47 GHz on the Atom E3826 versus 0.07 GHz on the Celeron U3400 — a 181.8% clock advantage for the Atom E3826. The Atom E3826 uses the Bay Trail-I (2013) architecture (22 nm), while the Celeron U3400 uses Westmere (2010−2011) (32 nm). In PassMark, the Atom E3826 scores 545 against the Celeron U3400's 575 — a 5.4% lead for the Celeron U3400. L3 cache: 0 kB on the Atom E3826 vs 2 MB on the Celeron U3400.

Feature	Atom E3826	Celeron U3400
Cores / Threads	2 / 2	2 / 2
Boost Clock	1.47 GHz+2000%	0.07 GHz
Base Clock	—	1.06 GHz
L3 Cache	0 kB	2 MB
L2 Cache	512 kB (per core)	512 kB
Process	22 nm-31%	32 nm
Architecture	Bay Trail-I (2013)	Westmere (2010−2011)
PassMark	545	575+6%

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Atom E3826 uses the FCBGA1170 socket (PCIe 2.0), while the Celeron U3400 uses BGA1288 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.