Celeron 2950M vs E2-6110

Celeron 2950M vs E2-6110 Performance Spectrum

Celeron 2950M

2 / 2

1,238

+0.3%

1,234

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 2950M vs E2-6110 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 2950M vs E2-6110: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

Celeron 2950M

2013

Why buy it

✅100+% more PCIe lanes (16 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with HD Graphics (Haswell), while E2-6110 needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌3313.3% higher power demand at 512W vs 15W.

E2-6110

2014

Why buy it

✅Draws 15W instead of 512W, a 497W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (1,234 vs 1,238).
❌No integrated graphics, while Celeron 2950M can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Quick Answers

So, is Celeron 2950M better than E2-6110?

Yes. Celeron 2950M is the better all-around CPU here. It gives you a 2.0% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data and 0.3% better PassMark, which is enough to make it the stronger overall pick.

Which one is better for gaming?

If gaming is the priority, Celeron 2950M is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 2.0% 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 2950M is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.3% better PassMark, backed by 2 cores and 2 threads.

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

Celeron 2950M still makes the most sense overall. Celeron 2950M comes in at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it still gives you a 2.0% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data.

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

E2-6110 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 2950M vs E2-6110 Technical Specifications

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

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.

E2-6110

The E2-6110 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 2014-01-01. It is based on the Beema (2014) architecture. It features 4 cores and 4 threads. Max frequency: 1.5 GHz. L2 cache: 2048 kB. Built on 28 nm process technology. Socket: FT3. Thermal design power (TDP): 15 Watt. Memory support: DDR3-1600. Passmark benchmark score: 1,234 points. Launch price was $50.

⚡

Processing Power

The Celeron 2950M packs 2 cores / 2 threads, while the E2-6110 offers 4 cores / 4 threads — the E2-6110 has 2 more cores. Boost clocks reach 2 GHz on the Celeron 2950M versus 1.5 GHz on the E2-6110 — a 28.6% clock advantage for the Celeron 2950M. The Celeron 2950M uses the Haswell (2013−2015) architecture (22 nm), while the E2-6110 uses Beema (2014) (28 nm). In PassMark, the Celeron 2950M scores 1,238 against the E2-6110's 1,234 — a 0.3% lead for the Celeron 2950M.

Feature	Celeron 2950M	E2-6110
Cores / Threads	2 / 2	4 / 4+100%
Boost Clock	2 GHz+33%	1.5 GHz
Base Clock	2 GHz	—
L3 Cache	2 MB (total)	—
L2 Cache	256K (per core)	2048 kB+700%
Process	22 nm-21%	28 nm
Architecture	Haswell (2013−2015)	Beema (2014)
PassMark	1,238	1,234
Geekbench 6 Single	352	—
Geekbench 6 Multi	636	—

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Celeron 2950M uses the PGA946 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the E2-6110 uses FT3 (PCIe 3.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.

Feature	Celeron 2950M	E2-6110
Socket	PGA946	FT3
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0	PCIe 3.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR3L-1600	—
Max RAM Capacity	32 GB	—
RAM Channels	2	—
ECC Support	No	—
PCIe Lanes	16	—

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization: VT-x (Celeron 2950M) / not specified (E2-6110). The Celeron 2950M includes integrated graphics (HD Graphics (Haswell)), while the E2-6110 requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Celeron 2950M targets Budget. Direct competitor: Celeron 2950M rivals Pentium 2020M.