Celeron 220
VS
Celeron 2.20

Celeron 220 vs Celeron 2.20

Intel

Celeron 220

1 Cores1 Thrd512 WWMax: 1.2 GHz2007
VS
Intel

Celeron 2.20

1 Cores1 Thrd73 WWMax: 2.2 GHz2002

Performance Spectrum - CPU

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.

Value Upgrade Path

This is the official ChipVERSUS Value Rating, comparing raw performance (PassMark) per dollar. Components placed above yours deliver better value for money. The Celeron 220 is positioned at rank 1143 and the Celeron 2.20 is on rank 1081, so the Celeron 2.20 offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.

MSRP is the manufacturer's suggested retail price.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.

Performance Per Dollar Celeron 220

#1131
Atom x5-Z8300
MSRP: $20|Avg: N/A
3850%
#1132
Atom Z3735G
MSRP: $17|Avg: N/A
3794%
#1133
Core i5-480M
MSRP: $81|Avg: $77
3483%
#1134
Core i5-460M
MSRP: $80|Avg: $129
3467%
#1135
Core i5-2540M
MSRP: $266|Avg: $10
3435%
#1137
Core i5-450M
MSRP: $32|Avg: $31
3318%
#1138
Core i3-380M
MSRP: $49|Avg: $25
3181%
#1139
Core i5-430M
MSRP: N/A|Avg: $33
3176%
#1140
Core 2 Duo T6600
MSRP: N/A|Avg: $4
3091%
#1143
Celeron 220
MSRP: $42|Avg: $42
100%
#1144
Pentium B960
MSRP: $134|Avg: $15
100%
#1146
Pentium 957
MSRP: $134|Avg: $10
99%
#1147
Core 2 Duo SL9400
MSRP: $284|Avg: N/A
99%
#1149
Pentium N3540
MSRP: $161|Avg: $161
98%
#1150
Core i7-3555LE
MSRP: $300|Avg: $280
98%
#1151
Core i3-2377M
MSRP: $250|Avg: N/A
97%
#1152
Core 2 Duo E8435
MSRP: $150|Avg: $74
97%
#1153
Celeron M 723
MSRP: $161|Avg: $161
96%
#1154
Core M-5Y51
MSRP: $281|Avg: $281
95%
#1155
Core i7-3517UE
MSRP: $330|Avg: $35
95%
#1156
Pentium N3530
MSRP: $161|Avg: $20
94%
#1158
Core i3-330E
MSRP: $177|Avg: $89
93%
Based on actual market prices and performance synthetic scores.

Performance Per Dollar Celeron 2.20

#1
Ryzen 9 7950X
MSRP: $194|Avg: $20
80755%
#2
Core i9-10900T
MSRP: $120|Avg: $5
76306%
#3
Ryzen 3 PRO 4355GE
MSRP: $423|Avg: $5
55404%
#4
Ryzen Threadripper 3960X
MSRP: $1399|Avg: $85
16691%
#5
Ryzen 9 9950X
MSRP: $649|Avg: $129
13221%
#6
Ryzen 5 8400F
MSRP: $303|Avg: $55
11566%
#7
Ryzen 7 PRO 2700
MSRP: $299|Avg: $60
6624%
#8
Ryzen 5 2600X
MSRP: $229|Avg: $55
6538%
#9
Ryzen 3 PRO 5350G
MSRP: $150|Avg: $60
5953%
#10
Core Ultra 5 245KF
MSRP: $294|Avg: $189
5952%
#11
Ryzen 5 5500
MSRP: $159|Avg: $85
5886%
#12
Ryzen 5 3600
MSRP: $199|Avg: $80
5727%
#13
Core i3-9100E
MSRP: $202|Avg: $30
5647%
#14
Core Ultra 5 245K
MSRP: $319|Avg: $200
5624%
#15
Core i3-8300T
MSRP: $138|Avg: $25
5573%
#1081
Celeron 2.20
MSRP: $79|Avg: $15
100%
#1082
Athlon 64 X2 4000+
MSRP: $328|Avg: $10
93%
#1083
Athlon 64 X2 5200+
MSRP: $420|Avg: $15
93%
#1084
Core i7-975
MSRP: $999|Avg: $50
91%
#1085
Athlon XP 2600+
MSRP: $98|Avg: $10
90%
#1086
Core i7-965
MSRP: $1000|Avg: $40
89%
#1087
Athlon 64 FX-74
MSRP: $499|Avg: $50
86%
#1088
Athlon 64 2000+
MSRP: $100|Avg: $20
85%
#1089
Athlon 64 X2 5600+
MSRP: $505|Avg: $15
85%
#1090
Core 2 Extreme QX9770
MSRP: $1399|Avg: $1399
85%
#1091
Athlon 64 X2 5400+
MSRP: $485|Avg: $78
85%
#1092
Celeron 2.30
MSRP: $100|Avg: $10
84%
#1093
Phenom X4 9450e
MSRP: $450|Avg: $430
84%
#1094
Athlon 64 X2 3800+
MSRP: $354|Avg: $20
80%
#1095
Athlon 64 3000+
MSRP: $149|Avg: $10
78%
#1096
Athlon XP 3100+
MSRP: $150|Avg: $20
73%
Based on actual market prices and performance synthetic scores.

Performance Comparison

About PassMark

🏆 Chipversus Verdict

🚀 Performance Leadership

Performance Trade-off: The Celeron 2.20 leads in gaming performance. However, the Celeron 220 is the stronger candidate for professional workloads, offering 4.8% greater multi-core processing power.
InsightCeleron 220Celeron 2.20
Gaming
Lower gaming performance
Superior gaming performance
Workstation
Better multi-core power
Weaker in multi-core tasks
Price
⚠️ Higher cost ($42)
More affordable ($15)
Longevity
🛑 Legacy (Conroe (2006−2007) / 65 nm)
🛑 Legacy (Northwood (2002−2004) / 130 nm)

💎 Value Proposition

Efficiency: Even within a comparison of older hardware, the Celeron 2.20 stands out as the superior choice. It is effectively 64% cheaper ($15 vs $42) while identifying as the stronger performer.
InsightCeleron 220Celeron 2.20
Cost Efficiency
Lower cost efficiency
Better overall value (+167%)
Upfront Cost
⚠️ Higher cost ($42)
More affordable ($15)

Performance Check

Paired with RTX 4090

To accurately isolate CPU performance, all benchmarks below use an NVIDIA RTX 4090 as the reference GPU. This eliminates GPU-side bottlenecks and highlights pure processing throughput differences between the CPUs.

Note: Real-world results may vary based on your actual GPU. CPU performance impact is more visible in processing-intensive titles and high-refresh-rate gaming scenarios.

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of Celeron 220 and Celeron 2.20

Intel

Celeron 220

The Celeron 220 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 2007-01-01. It is based on the Conroe (2006−2007) architecture. It features 1 cores and 1 threads. Base frequency is 1.2 GHz, with boost up to 1.2 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 512 kB. Built on 65 nm process technology. Socket: BGA479. Thermal design power (TDP): 19 Watt. Passmark benchmark score: 320 points. Launch price was $69.

Intel

Celeron 2.20

The Celeron 2.20 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 2007-01-01. It is based on the Northwood (2002−2004) architecture. It features 1 cores and 1 threads. Max frequency: 2.2 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 128 kB. Built on 130 nm process technology. Socket: PGA478. Thermal design power (TDP): 73 Watt. Memory support: DDR1, DDR2. Passmark benchmark score: 305 points. Launch price was $69.

Processing Power

Both the Celeron 220 and Celeron 2.20 share an identical 1-core/1-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 1.2 GHz on the Celeron 220 versus 2.2 GHz on the Celeron 2.20 — a 58.8% clock advantage for the Celeron 2.20. The Celeron 220 uses the Conroe (2006−2007) architecture (65 nm), while the Celeron 2.20 uses Northwood (2002−2004) (130 nm). In PassMark, the Celeron 220 scores 320 against the Celeron 2.20's 305 — a 4.8% lead for the Celeron 220. Both processors carry 0 kB of L3 cache.

FeatureCeleron 220Celeron 2.20
Cores / Threads
1 / 1
1 / 1
Boost Clock
1.2 GHz
2.2 GHz+83%
Base Clock
1.2 GHz
L3 Cache
0 kB
0 kB
L2 Cache
512 kB+300%
128 kB
Process
65 nm-50%
130 nm
Architecture
Conroe (2006−2007)
Northwood (2002−2004)
PassMark
320+5%
305
🧠

Memory & Platform

The Celeron 220 uses the BGA479 socket (PCIe 1.1), while the Celeron 2.20 uses PGA478 (PCIe 1.1) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR2-667 on the Celeron 220 versus DDR1-400 on the Celeron 2.20 — the Celeron 220 supports 66.7% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. Both support up to 4 GB of RAM. Both feature 1-channel memory with ECC support. Both provide 0 PCIe lanes. Chipset compatibility: 945G,G31,G41 (Celeron 220) and 845,850,865 (Celeron 2.20).

FeatureCeleron 220Celeron 2.20
Socket
BGA479
PGA478
PCIe Generation
PCIe 1.1
PCIe 1.1
Max RAM Speed
DDR2-667+100%
DDR1-400
Max RAM Capacity
4 GB
4 GB
RAM Channels
1
1
ECC Support
PCIe Lanes
0
0
🔧

Advanced Features

Neither processor supports overclocking. Both support No virtualization. Primary use case: Celeron 220 targets Budget, Celeron 2.20 targets Budget. Direct competitor: Celeron 220 rivals Athlon 64 3100+; Celeron 2.20 rivals Pentium 4 2.40.

FeatureCeleron 220Celeron 2.20
Integrated GPU
No
No
Unlocked
No
No
AVX-512
No
No
Virtualization
No
No
Target Use
Budget
Budget
💰

Value Analysis

The Celeron 220 launched at $42 MSRP, while the Celeron 2.20 debuted at $79. At current prices ($42 vs $15), the Celeron 2.20 is $27 cheaper. In terms of value (PassMark points per dollar), the Celeron 220 delivers 7.6 pts/$ vs 20.3 pts/$ for the Celeron 2.20 — making the Celeron 2.20 the 91% better value option.

FeatureCeleron 220Celeron 2.20
MSRP
$42-47%
$79
Avg Price (30d)
$42
$15-64%
Performance per Dollar
7.6
20.3+167%
Release Date
2007
2002