Atom S1260 vs Celeron U3400

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 S1260 vs Celeron U3400 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 S1260 vs Celeron U3400: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

Atom S1260

2012

Why buy it

✅Draws 9W instead of 18W, a 9W reduction.
✅100+% more PCIe lanes (8 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (555 vs 575).

Celeron U3400

2010

Why buy it

✅+3.6% higher PassMark.

Trade-offs

❌Launch MSRP is still $86 MSRP, while Atom S1260 mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
❌100% higher power demand at 18W vs 9W.

Quick Answers

So, is Atom S1260 better than Celeron U3400?

It depends on what you want from the system. For gaming, Atom S1260 is ahead with a 1.5% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. For rendering, compiling, streaming, and heavier multitasking, Celeron U3400 pulls ahead with 3.6% better PassMark.

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Celeron U3400 is the stronger fit. You are getting 3.6% better PassMark, backed by 2 cores and 2 threads.

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

Atom S1260 is the easy recommendation for a fresh desktop build. Atom S1260 comes in at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus $86 MSRP, and it still gives you a 1.5% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. Celeron U3400 only looks good on raw value math because it is a cheap legacy laptop chip, not because it is a real desktop gaming recommendation. It simply does not keep up in modern games, especially when the gap is already 1.5% in the shared gaming data.

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

Atom S1260 makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2012 vs 2010). That makes it the safer long-term bet.

Atom S1260 vs Celeron U3400 Technical Specifications

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

Atom S1260

The Atom S1260 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 11 December 2012 (12 years ago). It is based on the Centerton (2012) architecture. It features 2 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 2 GHz, with boost up to 2 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 512 kB (per core). Built on 32 nm process technology. Socket: FCBGA1283. Thermal design power (TDP): 8.5 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 555 points. Launch price was $64.

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

The Atom S1260 packs 2 cores / 4 threads, matching the Celeron U3400's 2 cores. Boost clocks reach 2 GHz on the Atom S1260 versus 0.07 GHz on the Celeron U3400 — a 186.5% clock advantage for the Atom S1260 (base: 2 GHz vs 1.06 GHz). The Atom S1260 uses the Centerton (2012) architecture (32 nm), while the Celeron U3400 uses Westmere (2010−2011) (32 nm). In PassMark, the Atom S1260 scores 555 against the Celeron U3400's 575 — a 3.5% lead for the Celeron U3400. L3 cache: 0 kB on the Atom S1260 vs 2 MB on the Celeron U3400.

Feature	Atom S1260	Celeron U3400
Cores / Threads	2 / 4	2 / 2
Boost Clock	2 GHz+2757%	0.07 GHz
Base Clock	2 GHz+89%	1.06 GHz
L3 Cache	0 kB	2 MB
L2 Cache	512 kB (per core)	512 kB
Process	32 nm	32 nm
Architecture	Centerton (2012)	Westmere (2010−2011)
PassMark	555	575+4%

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Atom S1260 uses the FCBGA1283 socket (PCIe 2.0), while the Celeron U3400 uses BGA1288 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.