Celeron 2950M vs Core 2 Solo SU3300
Celeron 2950M
Core 2 Solo SU3300
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 2950M is positioned at rank 545 and the Core 2 Solo SU3300 is on rank 1211, so the Celeron 2950M offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar Celeron 2950M
Performance Per Dollar Core 2 Solo SU3300
Performance Comparison
About PassMark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
| Insight | Celeron 2950M | Core 2 Solo SU3300 |
|---|---|---|
| Gaming | ✅ Superior gaming performance | ❌ Lower gaming performance |
| Workstation | ❌ Weaker in multi-core tasks | ✅ Better multi-core power |
| Price | ✅ More affordable ($0) | ⚠️ Higher cost ($50) |
| Longevity | 🛑 Legacy (Haswell (2013−2015) / 22 nm) | 🛑 Legacy (Penryn (2008−2011) / 45 nm) |
💎 Value Proposition
| Insight | Celeron 2950M | Core 2 Solo SU3300 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ❌ Lower cost efficiency | ❌ Lower cost efficiency |
| Upfront Cost | ✅ More affordable ($0) | ⚠️ Higher cost ($50) |
Performance Check
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 2950M and Core 2 Solo SU3300
Celeron 2950M
The Celeron 2950M is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 1 September 2013 (12 years ago). It is based on the Haswell (2013−2015) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 2 GHz, with boost up to 2 GHz. L3 cache: 2 MB (total). L2 cache: 256K (per core). Built on 22 nm process technology. Socket: PGA946. Thermal design power (TDP): 37 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 1,238 points. Launch price was $75.
Core 2 Solo SU3300
The Core 2 Solo SU3300 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 20 August 2008 (17 years ago). It is based on the Penryn (2008−2011) architecture. It features 1 cores and 1 threads. Max frequency: 1.2 GHz. L2 cache: 3 MB. Built on 45 nm process technology. Socket: BGA956. Thermal design power (TDP): 3 MB. Passmark benchmark score: 1,247 points. Launch price was $262.
Processing Power
The Celeron 2950M packs 2 cores / 2 threads, while the Core 2 Solo SU3300 offers 1 cores / 1 threads — the Celeron 2950M has 1 more core. Boost clocks reach 2 GHz on the Celeron 2950M versus 1.2 GHz on the Core 2 Solo SU3300 — a 50% clock advantage for the Celeron 2950M. The Celeron 2950M uses the Haswell (2013−2015) architecture (22 nm), while the Core 2 Solo SU3300 uses Penryn (2008−2011) (45 nm). In PassMark, the Celeron 2950M scores 1,238 against the Core 2 Solo SU3300's 1,247 — a 0.7% lead for the Core 2 Solo SU3300.
| Feature | Celeron 2950M | Core 2 Solo SU3300 |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 2 / 2+100% | 1 / 1 |
| Boost Clock | 2 GHz+67% | 1.2 GHz |
| Base Clock | 2 GHz | — |
| L3 Cache | 2 MB (total) | — |
| L2 Cache | 256K (per core) | 3 MB+1100% |
| Process | 22 nm-51% | 45 nm |
| Architecture | Haswell (2013−2015) | Penryn (2008−2011) |
| PassMark | 1,238 | 1,247 |
| Geekbench 6 Single | 352 | — |
| Geekbench 6 Multi | 636 | — |
Memory & Platform
The Celeron 2950M uses the PGA946 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Core 2 Solo SU3300 uses BGA956 (PCIe 1.1) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR3L-1600 on the Celeron 2950M versus DDR2-800 on the Core 2 Solo SU3300 — the Celeron 2950M supports 40% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The Celeron 2950M supports up to 32 GB of RAM compared to 4 GB — 155.6% more capacity for professional workloads. Memory channels: 2 (Celeron 2950M) vs 1 (Core 2 Solo SU3300). PCIe lanes: 16 (Celeron 2950M) vs 0 (Core 2 Solo SU3300) — the Celeron 2950M offers 16 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives.
| Feature | Celeron 2950M | Core 2 Solo SU3300 |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | PGA946 | BGA956 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 3.0+173% | PCIe 1.1 |
| Max RAM Speed | DDR3L-1600+50% | DDR2-800 |
| Max RAM Capacity | 32 GB+700% | 4 GB |
| RAM Channels | 2+100% | 1 |
| ECC Support | ❌ | ❌ |
| PCIe Lanes | 16 | 0 |
Advanced Features
Neither processor supports overclocking. Both support VT-x virtualization. The Celeron 2950M includes integrated graphics (HD Graphics (Haswell)), while the Core 2 Solo SU3300 requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Celeron 2950M targets Budget, Core 2 Solo SU3300 targets Mobile. Direct competitor: Celeron 2950M rivals Pentium 2020M.
| Feature | Celeron 2950M | Core 2 Solo SU3300 |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | Yes | No |
| IGPU Model | HD Graphics (Haswell) | — |
| Unlocked | No | No |
| AVX-512 | No | No |
| Virtualization | VT-x | VT-x |
| Target Use | Budget | Mobile |
Top Performing CPUs
The most powerful cpus ranked by PassMark CPU Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar CPU comparisons based on Celeron 2950M and Core 2 Solo SU3300
