Atom Z2760 vs Celeron 4305UE

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 Z2760 vs Celeron 4305UE 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 Z2760 vs Celeron 4305UE: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

Atom Z2760

2012

Why buy it

✅Draws 3W instead of 15W, a 12W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (1,697 vs 1,699).

Celeron 4305UE

2018

Why buy it

✅100+% more PCIe lanes (16 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Trade-offs

❌Launch MSRP is still $107 MSRP, while Atom Z2760 mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
❌400% higher power demand at 15W vs 3W.

Quick Answers

So, is Celeron 4305UE better than Atom Z2760?

Yes. Celeron 4305UE is the better all-around CPU here. It gives you a 1.0% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data, 0.1% better PassMark, and the stronger long-term platform, which is enough to make it the stronger overall pick.

Which one is better for gaming?

If gaming is the priority, Celeron 4305UE is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 1.0% 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 4305UE is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.1% better PassMark, backed by 2 cores and 2 threads.

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

Celeron 4305UE is the better buy right now. Celeron 4305UE comes in at an unclear MSRP at $107 MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it still gives you a 1.0% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. It is also 100.0% better value on MSRP (15.9 vs 0.0 PassMark/$), so you are getting the faster CPU without taking a value hit on paper.

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

Celeron 4305UE makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2018 vs 2012) and more multi-core headroom with 2 cores / 2 threads instead of 2/4. That extra compute headroom is more likely to matter as games, background tasks, and creator workloads get heavier.

Atom Z2760 vs Celeron 4305UE Technical Specifications

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

Atom Z2760

The Atom Z2760 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 27 September 2012 (13 years ago). It is based on the Cloverview (2012) architecture. It features 2 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 1.8 GHz, with boost up to 1.8 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 512K (per core). Built on 32 nm process technology. Socket: FC-MB4760. Thermal design power (TDP): 3 Watt. Memory support: DDR2. Passmark benchmark score: 1,697 points. Launch price was $69.

Celeron 4305UE

The Celeron 4305UE is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 1 October 2018 (7 years ago). It is based on the Whiskey Lake-U (2018−2019) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Max frequency: 2 GHz. L3 cache: 2 MB (total). L2 cache: 256 kB (per core). Built on 10 nm process technology. Socket: FCBGA1528. Thermal design power (TDP): 15 Watt. Memory support: DDR4. Passmark benchmark score: 1,699 points. Launch price was $107.

⚡

Processing Power

The Atom Z2760 packs 2 cores / 4 threads, matching the Celeron 4305UE's 2 cores. Boost clocks reach 1.8 GHz on the Atom Z2760 versus 2 GHz on the Celeron 4305UE — a 10.5% clock advantage for the Celeron 4305UE. The Atom Z2760 uses the Cloverview (2012) architecture (32 nm), while the Celeron 4305UE uses Whiskey Lake-U (2018−2019) (10 nm). In PassMark, the Atom Z2760 scores 1,697 against the Celeron 4305UE's 1,699 — a 0.1% lead for the Celeron 4305UE. L3 cache: 0 kB on the Atom Z2760 vs 2 MB (total) on the Celeron 4305UE.

Feature	Atom Z2760	Celeron 4305UE
Cores / Threads	2 / 4	2 / 2
Boost Clock	1.8 GHz	2 GHz+11%
Base Clock	1.8 GHz	—
L3 Cache	0 kB	2 MB (total)
L2 Cache	512K (per core)+100%	256 kB (per core)
Process	32 nm	10 nm-69%
Architecture	Cloverview (2012)	Whiskey Lake-U (2018−2019)
PassMark	1,697	1,699
Geekbench 6 Single	—	670
Geekbench 6 Multi	—	1,065

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Atom Z2760 uses the FC-MB4760 socket (PCIe 2.0), while the Celeron 4305UE uses FCBGA1528 (PCIe 3.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches LPDDR2-800 on the Atom Z2760 versus DDR4-2133 on the Celeron 4305UE — the Celeron 4305UE supports 166.6% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The Celeron 4305UE supports up to 64 GB of RAM compared to 2 GB — 3100% more capacity for professional workloads. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. PCIe lanes: 0 (Atom Z2760) vs 16 (Celeron 4305UE) — the Celeron 4305UE offers 16 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: Intel BGA1264 (Atom Z2760) and Whiskey Lake (Celeron 4305UE).

Feature	Atom Z2760	Celeron 4305UE
Socket	FC-MB4760	FCBGA1528
PCIe Generation	PCIe 2.0	PCIe 3.0+50%
Max RAM Speed	LPDDR2-800	DDR4-2133+167%
Max RAM Capacity	2 GB	64 GB+3100%
RAM Channels	2	2
ECC Support	No	No
PCIe Lanes	0	16

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization: not specified (Atom Z2760) / VT-x, VT-d, EPT (Celeron 4305UE). Both include integrated graphics — Intel GMA 3650 (Atom Z2760) and UHD Graphics 610 (Celeron 4305UE) — useful as a fallback for troubleshooting or display output without a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Celeron 4305UE targets Budget. Direct competitor: Celeron 4305UE rivals Athlon Silver 3050GE.