Atom Z3770 vs Celeron G465

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 Z3770 vs Celeron G465 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 Z3770 vs Celeron G465: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

Atom Z3770

2013

Why buy it

✅Draws 8W instead of 35W, a 27W reduction.

Trade-offs

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

Celeron G465

2012

Why buy it

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

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (1,185 vs 1,189).
❌Launch MSRP is still $70 MSRP, while Atom Z3770 mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
❌337.5% higher power demand at 35W vs 8W.

Quick Answers

So, is Atom Z3770 better than Celeron G465?

Yes. Atom Z3770 is the better all-around CPU here. It gives you a 2.1% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data, 0.3% 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, Atom Z3770 is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 2.1% 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, Atom Z3770 is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.3% better PassMark, backed by 4 cores and 4 threads.

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

Atom Z3770 is still the much better call for a fresh build. Atom Z3770 comes in at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus $70 MSRP, and it still gives you a 2.1% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. Celeron G465 only looks stronger on raw value math because it is extremely cheap, but that usually means used-market pricing on an obsolete 2012 platform. Even with 100.0% better value on paper (16.9 vs 0.0 PassMark/$), it really only makes sense as a cheap stopgap or a niche existing-platform option for someone already on LGA1155.

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

Atom Z3770 makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2013 vs 2012) and more multi-core headroom with 4 cores / 4 threads instead of 1/2. That extra compute headroom is more likely to matter as games, background tasks, and creator workloads get heavier.

Atom Z3770 vs Celeron G465 Technical Specifications

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

Atom Z3770

The Atom Z3770 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 27 September 2013 (12 years ago). It is based on the Bay Trail-T (2013−2014) architecture. It features 4 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 1.46 GHz, with boost up to 2.39 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 512K (per core). Built on 22 nm process technology. Socket: UTFCBGA1380. Thermal design power (TDP): 8 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 1,189 points. Launch price was $37.

Celeron G465

The Celeron G465 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 1 September 2012 (13 years ago). It is based on the Sandy Bridge (2011−2013) architecture. It features 1 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 1.9 GHz, with boost up to 1.9 GHz. L3 cache: 1.5 MB. L2 cache: 256 kB. Built on 32 nm process technology. Socket: LGA1155. Thermal design power (TDP): 35 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 1,185 points. Launch price was $80.

⚡

Processing Power

The Atom Z3770 packs 4 cores / 4 threads, while the Celeron G465 offers 1 cores / 2 threads — the Atom Z3770 has 3 more cores. Boost clocks reach 2.39 GHz on the Atom Z3770 versus 1.9 GHz on the Celeron G465 — a 22.8% clock advantage for the Atom Z3770 (base: 1.46 GHz vs 1.9 GHz). The Atom Z3770 uses the Bay Trail-T (2013−2014) architecture (22 nm), while the Celeron G465 uses Sandy Bridge (2011−2013) (32 nm). In PassMark, the Atom Z3770 scores 1,189 against the Celeron G465's 1,185 — a 0.3% lead for the Atom Z3770. L3 cache: 0 kB on the Atom Z3770 vs 1.5 MB on the Celeron G465.

Feature	Atom Z3770	Celeron G465
Cores / Threads	4 / 4+300%	1 / 2
Boost Clock	2.39 GHz+26%	1.9 GHz
Base Clock	1.46 GHz	1.9 GHz+30%
L3 Cache	0 kB	1.5 MB
L2 Cache	512K (per core)+100%	256 kB
Process	22 nm-31%	32 nm
Architecture	Bay Trail-T (2013−2014)	Sandy Bridge (2011−2013)
PassMark	1,189	1,185
Geekbench 6 Single	—	300

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Atom Z3770 uses the UTFCBGA1380 socket (PCIe 2.0), while the Celeron G465 uses LGA1155 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Both support up to LPDDR3-1066 memory speed. The Celeron G465 supports up to 32 GB of RAM compared to 4 GB — 700% more capacity for professional workloads. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. PCIe lanes: 0 (Atom Z3770) vs 16 (Celeron G465) — the Celeron G465 offers 16 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: Intel FC-UTBGA592 (Atom Z3770) and H61,B65,H67,Z68 (Celeron G465).

Feature	Atom Z3770	Celeron G465
Socket	UTFCBGA1380	LGA1155
PCIe Generation	PCIe 2.0	PCIe 2.0
Max RAM Speed	LPDDR3-1066	DDR3-1066
Max RAM Capacity	4 GB	32 GB+700%
RAM Channels	2	2
ECC Support	No	No
PCIe Lanes	0	16

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization: not specified (Atom Z3770) / VT-x (Celeron G465). Both include integrated graphics — Intel HD Graphics (Bay Trail) (Atom Z3770) and HD Graphics (Sandy Bridge) (Celeron G465) — useful as a fallback for troubleshooting or display output without a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Celeron G465 targets Budget. Direct competitor: Celeron G465 rivals Pentium G630.

Feature	Atom Z3770	Celeron G465
Integrated GPU	Yes	Yes
IGPU Model	Intel HD Graphics (Bay Trail)	HD Graphics (Sandy Bridge)
Unlocked	—	No
AVX-512	—	No
Virtualization	—	VT-x
Target Use	—	Budget