C-60 vs Celeron N2810

C-60 vs Celeron N2810 Performance Spectrum

C-60

2 / 2

1,483

+0.6%

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7955WX

Ryzen Threadripper 3990X

Celeron N2810

2 / 2

1,474

0.0%

Celeron J1800

Pentium Dual-Core E2200

Pentium Dual Core T4200

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.

C-60 vs Celeron N2810 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.

C-60 vs Celeron N2810: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

C-60

2011

Why buy it

✅+0.6% higher PassMark.

Trade-offs

❌Launch MSRP is still $50 MSRP, while Celeron N2810 mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
❌28.6% higher power demand at 9W vs 7W.

Celeron N2810

2013

Why buy it

✅Draws 7W instead of 9W, a 2W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (1,474 vs 1,483).

Quick Answers

So, is Celeron N2810 better than C-60?

It depends on what you want from the system. For gaming, Celeron N2810 is ahead with a 0.1% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. For rendering, compiling, streaming, and heavier multitasking, C-60 pulls ahead with 0.6% better PassMark.

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, C-60 is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.6% better PassMark, backed by 2 cores and 2 threads.

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

Celeron N2810 is the easy recommendation for a fresh desktop build. Celeron N2810 comes in at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus $50 MSRP, and it still gives you a 0.1% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. C-60 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 0.1% in the shared gaming data.

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

Celeron N2810 makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2013 vs 2011). That makes it the safer long-term bet.

C-60 vs Celeron N2810 Technical Specifications

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

C-60

The C-60 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 22 August 2011 (14 years ago). It is based on the Ontario (2011−2012) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 1 GHz, with boost up to 1.33 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 512K (per core). Built on 40 nm process technology. Socket: FT1. Thermal design power (TDP): 9 Watt. Memory support: DDR3 Single-channel. Passmark benchmark score: 1,483 points. Launch price was $69.

Celeron N2810

The Celeron N2810 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 11 September 2013 (12 years ago). It is based on the Bay Trail-M (2013−2014) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 2 GHz, with boost up to 2 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 512K (per core). Built on 22 nm process technology. Socket: FCBGA1170. Thermal design power (TDP): 7.5 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 1,474 points. Launch price was $260.

⚡

Processing Power

Both the C-60 and Celeron N2810 share an identical 2-core/2-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 1.33 GHz on the C-60 versus 2 GHz on the Celeron N2810 — a 40.2% clock advantage for the Celeron N2810 (base: 1 GHz vs 2 GHz). The C-60 uses the Ontario (2011−2012) architecture (40 nm), while the Celeron N2810 uses Bay Trail-M (2013−2014) (22 nm). In PassMark, the C-60 scores 1,483 against the Celeron N2810's 1,474 — a 0.6% lead for the C-60. Both processors carry 0 kB of L3 cache.

Feature	C-60	Celeron N2810
Cores / Threads	2 / 2	2 / 2
Boost Clock	1.33 GHz	2 GHz+50%
Base Clock	1 GHz	2 GHz+100%
L3 Cache	0 kB	0 kB
L2 Cache	512K (per core)	512K (per core)
Process	40 nm	22 nm-45%
Architecture	Ontario (2011−2012)	Bay Trail-M (2013−2014)
PassMark	1,483	1,474

🧠

Memory & Platform

The C-60 uses the FT1 socket (PCIe 2.0), while the Celeron N2810 uses FCBGA1170 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Both support up to DDR3-1066 memory speed. The Celeron N2810 supports up to 8 GB of RAM compared to 4 GB — 100% more capacity for professional workloads. Memory channels: 1 (C-60) vs 2 (Celeron N2810). Both provide 4 PCIe lanes. Chipset compatibility: AMD BGA413 (C-60) and FCBGA1170 (Celeron N2810).

Feature	C-60	Celeron N2810
Socket	FT1	FCBGA1170
PCIe Generation	PCIe 2.0	PCIe 2.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR3-1066	1066
Max RAM Capacity	4 GB	8 GB+100%
RAM Channels	1	2+100%
ECC Support	No	No
PCIe Lanes	4	4

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization: not specified (C-60) / true (Celeron N2810). Both include integrated graphics — Radeon HD 6290 (C-60) and Intel HD Graphics (Bay Trail) (Celeron N2810) — useful as a fallback for troubleshooting or display output without a dedicated GPU. Direct competitor: Celeron N2810 rivals AMD A4-1250.