Celeron 2961Y vs Celeron 3215U

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 2961Y vs Celeron 3215U 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 2961Y vs Celeron 3215U: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

Celeron 2961Y

2013

Why buy it

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (1,085 vs 1,091).

Celeron 3215U

2015

Why buy it

Trade-offs

❌Fewer obvious downsides in this matchup outside of normal market pricing swings.

Quick Answers

So, is Celeron 3215U better than Celeron 2961Y?

Yes. Celeron 3215U is the better all-around CPU here. It gives you a 0.3% average FPS lead across 41 shared CPU game tests in our data, 0.6% better PassMark, and the stronger long-term platform, which is enough to make it the stronger overall pick.

Which one is better for gaming?

If gaming is the priority, Celeron 3215U is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 0.3% more average FPS across 41 shared CPU game tests.

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Celeron 3215U is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.6% better PassMark, backed by 2 cores and 2 threads.

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

Celeron 3215U still makes the most sense overall. Celeron 3215U comes in at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it still gives you a 0.3% average FPS lead across 41 shared CPU game tests in our data.

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

Celeron 3215U makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2015 vs 2013) and more multi-core headroom with 2 cores / 2 threads instead of 2/2. That extra compute headroom is more likely to matter as games, background tasks, and creator workloads get heavier.

Celeron 2961Y vs Celeron 3215U Technical Specifications

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

Celeron 2961Y

The Celeron 2961Y is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 1 December 2013 (12 years ago). It is based on the Haswell (2013−2015) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 1.1 GHz, with boost up to 1.1 GHz. L3 cache: 2 MB (total). L2 cache: 256K (per core). Built on 22 nm process technology. Socket: FCBGA1168. Thermal design power (TDP): 11.5 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 1,085 points. Launch price was $107.

Celeron 3215U

The Celeron 3215U is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 1 June 2015 (10 years ago). It is based on the Broadwell (2015−2019) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 1.7 GHz, with boost up to 1.7 GHz. L3 cache: 2 MB. L2 cache: 512 kB. Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: FCBGA1168. Thermal design power (TDP): 15 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 1,091 points. Launch price was $107.

⚡

Processing Power

Both the Celeron 2961Y and Celeron 3215U share an identical 2-core/2-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 1.1 GHz on the Celeron 2961Y versus 1.7 GHz on the Celeron 3215U — a 42.9% clock advantage for the Celeron 3215U (base: 1.1 GHz vs 1.7 GHz). The Celeron 2961Y uses the Haswell (2013−2015) architecture (22 nm), while the Celeron 3215U uses Broadwell (2015−2019) (14 nm). In PassMark, the Celeron 2961Y scores 1,085 against the Celeron 3215U's 1,091 — a 0.6% lead for the Celeron 3215U. L3 cache: 2 MB (total) on the Celeron 2961Y vs 2 MB on the Celeron 3215U.

Feature	Celeron 2961Y	Celeron 3215U
Cores / Threads	2 / 2	2 / 2
Boost Clock	1.1 GHz	1.7 GHz+55%
Base Clock	1.1 GHz	1.7 GHz+55%
L3 Cache	2 MB (total)	2 MB
L2 Cache	256K (per core)	512 kB+100%
Process	22 nm	14 nm-36%
Architecture	Haswell (2013−2015)	Broadwell (2015−2019)
PassMark	1,085	1,091
Geekbench 6 Single	—	339

🧠

Memory & Platform

Both processors use the FCBGA1168 socket with PCIe 3.0. Both support up to DDR3L-1600 memory speed. Both support up to 16 GB of RAM. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. Both provide 12 PCIe lanes. Chipset compatibility: Wildcat Point-LP (Celeron 2961Y) and Wildcat Point-LP (Celeron 3215U).

Feature	Celeron 2961Y	Celeron 3215U
Socket	FCBGA1168	FCBGA1168
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0	PCIe 3.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR3L-1600	DDR3L-1600
Max RAM Capacity	16 GB	16 GB
RAM Channels	2	2
ECC Support	No	No
PCIe Lanes	12	12

🔧

Advanced Features

Neither processor supports overclocking. Virtualization support: VT-x (Celeron 2961Y) vs VT-x, VT-d (Celeron 3215U). Both include integrated graphics — HD Graphics (Haswell) (Celeron 2961Y) and HD Graphics (Broadwell) (Celeron 3215U) — useful as a fallback for troubleshooting or display output without a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Celeron 2961Y targets Budget, Celeron 3215U targets Budget. Direct competitor: Celeron 2961Y rivals Pentium 2117U; Celeron 3215U rivals Pentium 3825U.