Celeron 1037U vs Celeron N2930

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 N2930 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 N2930: 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

✅+90.6% higher Geekbench single-core performance for gaming and desktop responsiveness.
✅300% more PCIe lanes (16 vs 4) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Trade-offs

❌7214.3% higher power demand at 512W vs 7W.

Celeron N2930

2014

Why buy it

✅Draws 7W instead of 512W, a 505W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Lower Geekbench single-core performance for gaming (170 vs 324).
❌Lower Geekbench multi-core (502 vs 626).

Quick Answers

So, is Celeron 1037U better than Celeron N2930?

Yes. Celeron 1037U is the better all-around CPU here. It gives you a 1.7% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data, 24.7% better Geekbench multi-core, and 0.2% 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 1.7% 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 24.7% 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 1.7% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data.

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

Celeron N2930 makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2014 vs 2013). That makes it the safer long-term bet.

Celeron 1037U vs Celeron N2930 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 N2930

The Celeron N2930 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 2007-01-01. It is based on the Bay Trail-M (2013−2014) architecture. It features 4 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 1.83 GHz, with boost up to 2.16 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: 1,032 points. Launch price was $69.

⚡

Processing Power

The Celeron 1037U packs 2 cores / 2 threads, while the Celeron N2930 offers 4 cores / 4 threads — the Celeron N2930 has 2 more cores. Boost clocks reach 1.8 GHz on the Celeron 1037U versus 2.16 GHz on the Celeron N2930 — a 18.2% clock advantage for the Celeron N2930 (base: 1.8 GHz vs 1.83 GHz). The Celeron 1037U uses the Ivy Bridge (2012−2013) architecture (22 nm), while the Celeron N2930 uses Bay Trail-M (2013−2014) (22 nm). In PassMark, the Celeron 1037U scores 1,034 against the Celeron N2930's 1,032 — a 0.2% lead for the Celeron 1037U. Geekbench 6 single-core — the metric most relevant to gaming — records 324 vs 170, a 62.3% lead for the Celeron 1037U that directly translates to higher frame rates. Multi-core Geekbench: 626 vs 502 (22% advantage for the Celeron 1037U). L3 cache: 2 MB (total) on the Celeron 1037U vs 0 kB on the Celeron N2930.

Feature	Celeron 1037U	Celeron N2930
Cores / Threads	2 / 2	4 / 4+100%
Boost Clock	1.8 GHz	2.16 GHz+20%
Base Clock	1.8 GHz	1.83 GHz+2%
L3 Cache	2 MB (total)	0 kB
L2 Cache	256K (per core)	512K (per core)+100%
Process	22 nm	22 nm
Architecture	Ivy Bridge (2012−2013)	Bay Trail-M (2013−2014)
PassMark	1,034	1,032
Geekbench 6 Single	324+91%	170
Geekbench 6 Multi	626+25%	502

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Celeron 1037U uses the BGA1023 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Celeron N2930 uses FCBGA1170 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR3-1600 on the Celeron 1037U versus DDR3L-1333 on the Celeron N2930 — the Celeron 1037U supports 20% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The Celeron 1037U supports up to 32 GB of RAM compared to 8 GB — 300% more capacity for professional workloads. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. PCIe lanes: 16 (Celeron 1037U) vs 4 (Celeron N2930) — the Celeron 1037U offers 12 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: HM70,NM70,HM76 (Celeron 1037U) and SoC (Celeron N2930).

Feature	Celeron 1037U	Celeron N2930
Socket	BGA1023	FCBGA1170
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0+50%	PCIe 2.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR3-1600+20%	DDR3L-1333
Max RAM Capacity	32 GB+300%	8 GB
RAM Channels	2	2
ECC Support	No	No
PCIe Lanes	16+300%	4

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization support: VT-x, EPT (Celeron 1037U) vs Yes (Celeron N2930). Both include integrated graphics — HD Graphics (Ivy Bridge) (Celeron 1037U) and Intel HD Graphics (Celeron N2930) — useful as a fallback for troubleshooting or display output without a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Celeron 1037U targets Budget Mobile. Direct competitor: Celeron 1037U rivals AMD E1-2500.