Celeron 1047UE vs Opteron 154

Celeron 1047UE vs Opteron 154 Performance Spectrum

Celeron 1047UE

2 / 2

675

+3.1%

655

0.0%

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3955WX

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7955WX

Ryzen Threadripper 3990X

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.

Celeron 1047UE vs Opteron 154 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 1047UE vs Opteron 154: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

Celeron 1047UE

2013

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +6.3% higher average FPS across 33 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅100+% more PCIe lanes (16 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with Intel HD Graphics (Ivy Bridge), while Opteron 154 needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌Launch MSRP is still $100 MSRP, while Opteron 154 mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
❌392.3% higher power demand at 512W vs 104W.

Opteron 154

2005

Why buy it

✅Draws 104W instead of 512W, a 408W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Celeron 1047UE across 33 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (655 vs 675).
❌No integrated graphics, while Celeron 1047UE can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Quick Answers

So, is Celeron 1047UE better than Opteron 154?

Not really, because they are built for different jobs. Opteron 154 makes more sense for workstation-style multi-core throughput, while Celeron 1047UE is the more practical desktop choice for gaming, platform cost, and everyday use.

Which one is better for gaming?

If gaming is the priority, Celeron 1047UE is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 6.3% more average FPS across 33 shared CPU game tests.

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Celeron 1047UE is the stronger fit. You are getting 3.1% better PassMark, backed by 2 cores and 2 threads.

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

Celeron 1047UE is the better buy right now. Celeron 1047UE comes in at an unclear MSRP at $100 MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it still gives you a 6.3% average FPS lead across 33 shared CPU game tests in our data. It is also 100.0% better value on MSRP (6.8 vs 0.0 PassMark/$), so you are getting the faster CPU without taking a value hit on paper.

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

Celeron 1047UE makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2013 vs 2005) and more multi-core headroom with 2 cores / 2 threads instead of 1/1. That extra compute headroom is more likely to matter as games, background tasks, and creator workloads get heavier.

Celeron 1047UE vs Opteron 154 Technical Specifications

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

Celeron 1047UE

The Celeron 1047UE 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. Max frequency: 1.4 GHz. L3 cache: 2 MB (total). L2 cache: 256K (per core). Built on 22 nm process technology. Socket: BGA1023. Thermal design power (TDP): 512 kB + 2 MB. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 675 points. Launch price was $134.

Opteron 154

The Opteron 154 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 2015-01-01. It is based on the Venus (2004−2005) architecture. It features 1 cores and 1 threads. Base frequency is 2.8 GHz, with boost up to 2.8 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 1 MB. Built on 90 nm process technology. Socket: 939. Thermal design power (TDP): 104 Watt. Memory support: DDR1. Passmark benchmark score: 655 points. Launch price was $800.

⚡

Processing Power

The Celeron 1047UE packs 2 cores / 2 threads, while the Opteron 154 offers 1 cores / 1 threads — the Celeron 1047UE has 1 more core. Boost clocks reach 1.4 GHz on the Celeron 1047UE versus 2.8 GHz on the Opteron 154 — a 66.7% clock advantage for the Opteron 154. The Celeron 1047UE uses the Ivy Bridge (2012−2013) architecture (22 nm), while the Opteron 154 uses Venus (2004−2005) (90 nm). In PassMark, the Celeron 1047UE scores 675 against the Opteron 154's 655 — a 3% lead for the Celeron 1047UE. L3 cache: 2 MB (total) on the Celeron 1047UE vs 0 kB on the Opteron 154.

Feature	Celeron 1047UE	Opteron 154
Cores / Threads	2 / 2+100%	1 / 1
Boost Clock	1.4 GHz	2.8 GHz+100%
Base Clock	—	2.8 GHz
L3 Cache	2 MB (total)	0 kB
L2 Cache	256K (per core)+25500%	1 MB
Process	22 nm-76%	90 nm
Architecture	Ivy Bridge (2012−2013)	Venus (2004−2005)
PassMark	675+3%	655
Geekbench 6 Single	159	—
Geekbench 6 Multi	293	—

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Celeron 1047UE uses the BGA1023 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Opteron 154 uses 939 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.

Feature	Celeron 1047UE	Opteron 154
Socket	BGA1023	939
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0+50%	PCIe 2.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR3-1600	—
Max RAM Capacity	16 GB	—
RAM Channels	2	—
ECC Support	Yes	—
PCIe Lanes	16	—

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization: VT-x (Celeron 1047UE) / not specified (Opteron 154). The Celeron 1047UE includes integrated graphics (Intel HD Graphics (Ivy Bridge)), while the Opteron 154 requires a dedicated GPU.