Celeron 1020M vs Core i3-2348M

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.

Celeron 1020M vs Core i3-2348M 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.

Celeron 1020M vs Core i3-2348M: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

Celeron 1020M

2013

Why buy it

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (1,275 vs 1,286).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (2 MB vs 3 MB).

Core i3-2348M

2013

Why buy it

✅+50% larger total L3 cache (3 MB vs 2 MB).

Trade-offs

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

Quick Answers

So, is Core i3-2348M better than Celeron 1020M?

Yes. Core i3-2348M is the better all-around CPU here. It gives you a 0.1% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data, 0.9% 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, Core i3-2348M is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 0.1% 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, Core i3-2348M is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.9% better PassMark, backed by 2 cores and 4 threads. It also has the larger cache pool with 50% larger total L3 cache (3 MB vs 2 MB).

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

Core i3-2348M still makes the most sense overall. Core i3-2348M comes in at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it still gives you a 0.1% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data.

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

Core i3-2348M makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting 50% larger total L3 cache (3 MB vs 2 MB) and more multi-core headroom with 2 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.

Celeron 1020M vs Core i3-2348M Technical Specifications

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

Celeron 1020M

The Celeron 1020M is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 20 January 2013 (12 years ago). It is based on the Ivy Bridge (2012−2013) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 2.1 GHz, with boost up to 2.1 GHz. L3 cache: 2 MB (total). L2 cache: 256K (per core). Built on 22 nm process technology. Socket: PGA988. Thermal design power (TDP): 35 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 1,275 points. Launch price was $86.

Core i3-2348M

The Core i3-2348M is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 1 January 2013 (12 years ago). It is based on the Sandy Bridge (2011−2013) architecture. It features 2 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 2.3 GHz, with boost up to 2.3 GHz. L3 cache: 3 MB. L2 cache: 512 kB. Built on 32 nm process technology. Socket: PGA988. Thermal design power (TDP): 35 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 1,286 points. Launch price was $225.

⚡

Processing Power

The Celeron 1020M packs 2 cores / 2 threads, matching the Core i3-2348M's 2 cores. Boost clocks reach 2.1 GHz on the Celeron 1020M versus 2.3 GHz on the Core i3-2348M — a 9.1% clock advantage for the Core i3-2348M (base: 2.1 GHz vs 2.3 GHz). The Celeron 1020M uses the Ivy Bridge (2012−2013) architecture (22 nm), while the Core i3-2348M uses Sandy Bridge (2011−2013) (32 nm). In PassMark, the Celeron 1020M scores 1,275 against the Core i3-2348M's 1,286 — a 0.9% lead for the Core i3-2348M. L3 cache: 2 MB (total) on the Celeron 1020M vs 3 MB on the Core i3-2348M.

Feature	Celeron 1020M	Core i3-2348M
Cores / Threads	2 / 2	2 / 4
Boost Clock	2.1 GHz	2.3 GHz+10%
Base Clock	2.1 GHz	2.3 GHz+10%
L3 Cache	2 MB (total)	3 MB+50%
L2 Cache	256K (per core)	512 kB+100%
Process	22 nm-31%	32 nm
Architecture	Ivy Bridge (2012−2013)	Sandy Bridge (2011−2013)
PassMark	1,275	1,286

🧠

Memory & Platform

Both processors use the PGA988 socket with PCIe 3.0. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR3-1600 on the Celeron 1020M versus 1333 on the Core i3-2348M — the Celeron 1020M supports 20% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The Celeron 1020M supports up to 32 GB of RAM compared to 16 GB — 100% more capacity for professional workloads. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. Both provide 16 PCIe lanes. Chipset compatibility: HM77,HM76,HM75 (Celeron 1020M) and HM65,HM67,QM67,QS67 (Core i3-2348M).

Feature	Celeron 1020M	Core i3-2348M
Socket	PGA988	PGA988
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0+50%	PCIe 2.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR3-1600+20%	1333
Max RAM Capacity	32 GB+100%	16 GB
RAM Channels	2	2
ECC Support	No	No
PCIe Lanes	16	16

🔧

Advanced Features

Neither processor supports overclocking. Virtualization support: VT-x (Celeron 1020M) vs true (Core i3-2348M). Both include integrated graphics — HD Graphics (Ivy Bridge) (Celeron 1020M) and Intel HD Graphics 3000 (Core i3-2348M) — useful as a fallback for troubleshooting or display output without a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Celeron 1020M targets Budget. Direct competitor: Celeron 1020M rivals Pentium 2020M; Core i3-2348M rivals Core i3-2330M.