Celeron 1037U vs Celeron 3205U

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 1037U vs Celeron 3205U 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 1037U vs Celeron 3205U: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

Celeron 1037U

2013

Why buy it

✅+12.9% higher Geekbench single-core performance for gaming and desktop responsiveness.

Trade-offs

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

Celeron 3205U

2015

Why buy it

Trade-offs

❌Lower Geekbench single-core performance for gaming (287 vs 324).
❌Lower Geekbench multi-core (483 vs 626).

Quick Answers

So, is Celeron 1037U better than Celeron 3205U?

Yes. Celeron 1037U 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, 29.6% better Geekbench multi-core, and 0.9% higher PassMark, which is enough to make it the stronger overall pick.

Which one is better for gaming?

If gaming is the priority, Celeron 1037U 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, Celeron 1037U is the stronger fit. You are getting 29.6% better Geekbench multi-core, backed by 2 cores and 2 threads.

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

Celeron 1037U still makes the most sense overall. Celeron 1037U 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?

Celeron 3205U makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2015 vs 2013). That makes it the safer long-term bet.

Celeron 1037U vs Celeron 3205U Technical Specifications

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

Celeron 1037U

The Celeron 1037U 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 1.8 GHz, with boost up to 1.8 GHz. L3 cache: 2 MB (total). L2 cache: 256K (per core). Built on 22 nm process technology. Socket: BGA1023. Thermal design power (TDP): 17 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 1,034 points. Launch price was $86.

Celeron 3205U

The Celeron 3205U is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 1 March 2015 (10 years ago). It is based on the Broadwell-U (2015) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 1.5 GHz, with boost up to 1.5 GHz. L3 cache: 2 MB (total). L2 cache: 256K (per core). Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: FCBGA1168. Thermal design power (TDP): 15 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 1,025 points. Launch price was $107.

⚡

Processing Power

Both the Celeron 1037U and Celeron 3205U share an identical 2-core/2-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 1.8 GHz on the Celeron 1037U versus 1.5 GHz on the Celeron 3205U — a 18.2% clock advantage for the Celeron 1037U (base: 1.8 GHz vs 1.5 GHz). The Celeron 1037U uses the Ivy Bridge (2012−2013) architecture (22 nm), while the Celeron 3205U uses Broadwell-U (2015) (14 nm). In PassMark, the Celeron 1037U scores 1,034 against the Celeron 3205U's 1,025 — a 0.9% lead for the Celeron 1037U. Geekbench 6 single-core — the metric most relevant to gaming — records 324 vs 287, a 12.1% lead for the Celeron 1037U that directly translates to higher frame rates. Multi-core Geekbench: 626 vs 483 (25.8% advantage for the Celeron 1037U). Both processors carry 2 MB (total) of L3 cache.

Feature	Celeron 1037U	Celeron 3205U
Cores / Threads	2 / 2	2 / 2
Boost Clock	1.8 GHz+20%	1.5 GHz
Base Clock	1.8 GHz+20%	1.5 GHz
L3 Cache	2 MB (total)	2 MB (total)
L2 Cache	256K (per core)	256K (per core)
Process	22 nm	14 nm-36%
Architecture	Ivy Bridge (2012−2013)	Broadwell-U (2015)
PassMark	1,034	1,025
Geekbench 6 Single	324+13%	287
Geekbench 6 Multi	626+30%	483

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Celeron 1037U uses the BGA1023 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Celeron 3205U uses FCBGA1168 (PCIe 3.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Both support up to DDR3-1600 memory speed. The Celeron 1037U 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: HM70,NM70,HM76 (Celeron 1037U) and Wildcat Point-LP (Celeron 3205U).

Feature	Celeron 1037U	Celeron 3205U
Socket	BGA1023	FCBGA1168
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0	PCIe 3.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR3-1600	DDR3L-1600
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, EPT (Celeron 1037U) vs VT-x (Celeron 3205U). Both include integrated graphics — HD Graphics (Ivy Bridge) (Celeron 1037U) and HD Graphics (Broadwell) (Celeron 3205U) — useful as a fallback for troubleshooting or display output without a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Celeron 1037U targets Budget Mobile, Celeron 3205U targets Budget. Direct competitor: Celeron 1037U rivals AMD E1-2500; Celeron 3205U rivals Pentium 2117U.

Feature	Celeron 1037U	Celeron 3205U
Integrated GPU	Yes	Yes
IGPU Model	HD Graphics (Ivy Bridge)	HD Graphics (Broadwell)
Unlocked	No	No
AVX-512	No	No
Virtualization	VT-x, EPT	VT-x
Target Use	Budget Mobile	Budget