Celeron 2981U vs Celeron N2920

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 2981U vs Celeron N2920 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 2981U vs Celeron N2920: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

Celeron 2981U

2014

Why buy it

✅+0.6% higher PassMark.
✅200% more PCIe lanes (12 vs 4) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Trade-offs

❌Launch MSRP is still $137 MSRP, while Celeron N2920 mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
❌7214.3% higher power demand at 512W vs 7W.

Celeron N2920

2013

Why buy it

✅Draws 7W instead of 512W, a 505W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (1,030 vs 1,036).

Quick Answers

So, is Celeron 2981U better than Celeron N2920?

It depends on what you want from the system. For gaming, Celeron N2920 is ahead with a 1.7% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. For rendering, compiling, streaming, and heavier multitasking, Celeron 2981U pulls ahead with 0.6% better PassMark.

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Celeron 2981U 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 2981U is the better buy right now. Celeron 2981U comes in at an unclear MSRP at $137 MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it still gives you 0.6% better PassMark. The compromise is that Celeron N2920 is still the better pure gaming CPU with a 1.7% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. It is also 100.0% better value on MSRP (7.6 vs 0.0 PassMark/$), 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 2981U makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2014 vs 2013) and more multi-core headroom with 2 cores / 2 threads instead of 4/4. That extra compute headroom is more likely to matter as games, background tasks, and creator workloads get heavier.

Celeron 2981U vs Celeron N2920 Technical Specifications

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

Celeron 2981U

The Celeron 2981U is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 2007-01-01. It is based on the Haswell (2013−2015) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 1.6 GHz, with boost up to 1.6 GHz. L3 cache: 2 MB. L2 cache: 512 kB. Built on 22 nm process technology. Socket: FCBGA1168. Thermal design power (TDP): 15 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 1,036 points. Launch price was $69.

Celeron N2920

The Celeron N2920 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 1 December 2013 (12 years ago). It is based on the Bay Trail-M (2013−2014) architecture. It features 4 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 1.86 GHz, with boost up to 2 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 512K (per core). Built on 22 nm process technology. Socket: FCBGA1170. Thermal design power (TDP): 7.5 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 1,030 points. Launch price was $107.

⚡

Processing Power

The Celeron 2981U packs 2 cores / 2 threads, while the Celeron N2920 offers 4 cores / 4 threads — the Celeron N2920 has 2 more cores. Boost clocks reach 1.6 GHz on the Celeron 2981U versus 2 GHz on the Celeron N2920 — a 22.2% clock advantage for the Celeron N2920 (base: 1.6 GHz vs 1.86 GHz). The Celeron 2981U uses the Haswell (2013−2015) architecture (22 nm), while the Celeron N2920 uses Bay Trail-M (2013−2014) (22 nm). In PassMark, the Celeron 2981U scores 1,036 against the Celeron N2920's 1,030 — a 0.6% lead for the Celeron 2981U. L3 cache: 2 MB on the Celeron 2981U vs 0 kB on the Celeron N2920.

Feature	Celeron 2981U	Celeron N2920
Cores / Threads	2 / 2	4 / 4+100%
Boost Clock	1.6 GHz	2 GHz+25%
Base Clock	1.6 GHz	1.86 GHz+16%
L3 Cache	2 MB	0 kB
L2 Cache	512 kB	512K (per core)
Process	22 nm	22 nm
Architecture	Haswell (2013−2015)	Bay Trail-M (2013−2014)
PassMark	1,036	1,030

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Celeron 2981U uses the FCBGA1168 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Celeron N2920 uses FCBGA1170 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR3L-1600 on the Celeron 2981U versus 1066 on the Celeron N2920 — the Celeron 2981U supports 50.1% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The Celeron 2981U supports up to 16 GB of RAM compared to 8 GB — 100% more capacity for professional workloads. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. PCIe lanes: 12 (Celeron 2981U) vs 4 (Celeron N2920) — the Celeron 2981U offers 8 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: Wildcat Point-LP (Celeron 2981U) and FCBGA1170 (Celeron N2920).

Feature	Celeron 2981U	Celeron N2920
Socket	FCBGA1168	FCBGA1170
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0+50%	PCIe 2.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR3L-1600+50%	1066
Max RAM Capacity	16 GB+100%	8 GB
RAM Channels	2	2
ECC Support	No	No
PCIe Lanes	12+200%	4

🔧

Advanced Features

Neither processor supports overclocking. Virtualization support: VT-x (Celeron 2981U) vs true (Celeron N2920). Both include integrated graphics — HD Graphics (Haswell) (Celeron 2981U) and Intel HD Graphics (Bay Trail) (Celeron N2920) — useful as a fallback for troubleshooting or display output without a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Celeron 2981U targets Budget. Direct competitor: Celeron 2981U rivals Pentium 2117U; Celeron N2920 rivals AMD A4-6210.