Atom x5-Z8330 vs Celeron G1820TE

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 x5-Z8330 vs Celeron G1820TE 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 x5-Z8330 vs Celeron G1820TE: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

Atom x5-Z8330

2016

Why buy it

✅+0.5% higher PassMark.

Trade-offs

❌Fewer obvious downsides in this matchup outside of normal market pricing swings.

Celeron G1820TE

2013

Why buy it

✅1500% more PCIe lanes (16 vs 1) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (1,020 vs 1,025).

Quick Answers

So, is Atom x5-Z8330 better than Celeron G1820TE?

It depends on what you want from the system. For gaming, Celeron G1820TE is ahead with a 0.9% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. For rendering, compiling, streaming, and heavier multitasking, Atom x5-Z8330 pulls ahead with 0.5% better PassMark.

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Atom x5-Z8330 is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.5% better PassMark, backed by 4 cores and 4 threads.

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

Atom x5-Z8330 still makes the most sense overall. Atom x5-Z8330 comes in at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it still gives you 0.5% better PassMark.

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

Atom x5-Z8330 makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2016 vs 2013) and more multi-core headroom with 4 cores / 4 threads instead of 2/2. That extra compute headroom is more likely to matter as games, background tasks, and creator workloads get heavier.

Atom x5-Z8330 vs Celeron G1820TE Technical Specifications

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

Atom x5-Z8330

The Atom x5-Z8330 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 8 February 2016 (9 years ago). It is based on the Airmont (2016) architecture. It features 4 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 1.44 GHz, with boost up to 1.92 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 2 MB. Built on 14 nm process technology. Memory support: DDR3L-RS 1600. Passmark benchmark score: 1,025 points. Launch price was $69.

Celeron G1820TE

The Celeron G1820TE is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 2007-01-01. It is based on the Haswell (2013−2015) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 2.2 GHz, with boost up to 2.2 GHz. L3 cache: 3 MB (total). L2 cache: 256 kB (per core). Built on 22 nm process technology. Socket: LGA1150. Thermal design power (TDP): 54 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 1,020 points. Launch price was $69.

⚡

Processing Power

The Atom x5-Z8330 packs 4 cores / 4 threads, while the Celeron G1820TE offers 2 cores / 2 threads — the Atom x5-Z8330 has 2 more cores. Boost clocks reach 1.92 GHz on the Atom x5-Z8330 versus 2.2 GHz on the Celeron G1820TE — a 13.6% clock advantage for the Celeron G1820TE (base: 1.44 GHz vs 2.2 GHz). The Atom x5-Z8330 uses the Airmont (2016) architecture (14 nm), while the Celeron G1820TE uses Haswell (2013−2015) (22 nm). In PassMark, the Atom x5-Z8330 scores 1,025 against the Celeron G1820TE's 1,020 — a 0.5% lead for the Atom x5-Z8330. L3 cache: 0 kB on the Atom x5-Z8330 vs 3 MB (total) on the Celeron G1820TE.

Feature	Atom x5-Z8330	Celeron G1820TE
Cores / Threads	4 / 4+100%	2 / 2
Boost Clock	1.92 GHz	2.2 GHz+15%
Base Clock	1.44 GHz	2.2 GHz+53%
L3 Cache	0 kB	3 MB (total)
L2 Cache	2 MB+700%	256 kB (per core)
Process	14 nm-36%	22 nm
Architecture	Airmont (2016)	Haswell (2013−2015)
PassMark	1,025	1,020
Geekbench 6 Single	—	415
Geekbench 6 Multi	—	629

🧠

Memory & Platform

Maximum memory speed reaches DDR3L-RS 1600 on the Atom x5-Z8330 versus DDR3-1333 on the Celeron G1820TE — the Atom x5-Z8330 supports 20% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The Celeron G1820TE supports up to 32 GB of RAM compared to 2 GB — 1500% more capacity for professional workloads. Memory channels: 1 (Atom x5-Z8330) vs 2 (Celeron G1820TE). PCIe lanes: 1 (Atom x5-Z8330) vs 16 (Celeron G1820TE) — the Celeron G1820TE offers 15 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: Intel FC-UTBGA592 (Atom x5-Z8330) and H81,B85,H87,Z87,H97,Z97 (Celeron G1820TE).

Feature	Atom x5-Z8330	Celeron G1820TE
Socket	—	LGA1150
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0	PCIe 3.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR3L-RS 1600+20%	DDR3-1333
Max RAM Capacity	2 GB	32 GB+1500%
RAM Channels	1	2+100%
ECC Support	No	Yes
PCIe Lanes	1	16+1500%

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization: not specified (Atom x5-Z8330) / VT-x (Celeron G1820TE). Both include integrated graphics — Intel HD Graphics (Cherry Trail) (Atom x5-Z8330) and HD Graphics (Haswell) (Celeron G1820TE) — useful as a fallback for troubleshooting or display output without a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Celeron G1820TE targets Budget. Direct competitor: Celeron G1820TE rivals Pentium G3220T.