CPU
GPU
Celeron 3765U
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 3765U is positioned at rank 445 and the Core 2 Solo SU3300 is on rank 1211, so the Celeron 3765U offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar Celeron 3765U
Performance Per Dollar Core 2 Solo SU3300
Performance Comparison
About PassMark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
| Insight | Celeron 3765U | Core 2 Solo SU3300 |
|---|---|---|
| Gaming | ✅ Superior gaming performance | ❌ Lower gaming performance |
| Workstation | ✅ Better multi-core power | ❌ Weaker in multi-core tasks |
| Price | ✅ More affordable ($0) | ⚠️ Higher cost ($50) |
| Longevity | 🛑 Legacy (Broadwell (2015−2019) / 14 nm) | 🛑 Legacy (Penryn (2008−2011) / 45 nm) |
💎 Value Proposition
| Insight | Celeron 3765U | 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.
League of Legends
Valorant
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of Celeron 3765U and Core 2 Solo SU3300
Celeron 3765U
The Celeron 3765U 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 1.9 GHz, with boost up to 1.9 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: 1,252 points. Launch price was $107.
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 3765U packs 2 cores / 2 threads, while the Core 2 Solo SU3300 offers 1 cores / 1 threads — the Celeron 3765U has 1 more core. Boost clocks reach 1.9 GHz on the Celeron 3765U versus 1.2 GHz on the Core 2 Solo SU3300 — a 45.2% clock advantage for the Celeron 3765U. The Celeron 3765U uses the Broadwell (2015−2019) architecture (14 nm), while the Core 2 Solo SU3300 uses Penryn (2008−2011) (45 nm). In PassMark, the Celeron 3765U scores 1,252 against the Core 2 Solo SU3300's 1,247 — a 0.4% lead for the Celeron 3765U.
| Feature | Celeron 3765U | Core 2 Solo SU3300 |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 2 / 2+100% | 1 / 1 |
| Boost Clock | 1.9 GHz+58% | 1.2 GHz |
| Base Clock | 1.9 GHz | — |
| L3 Cache | 2 MB | — |
| L2 Cache | 512 kB | 3 MB+500% |
| Process | 14 nm-69% | 45 nm |
| Architecture | Broadwell (2015−2019) | Penryn (2008−2011) |
| PassMark | 1,252 | 1,247 |
Memory & Platform
The Celeron 3765U uses the FCBGA1168 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 3765U versus DDR2-800 on the Core 2 Solo SU3300 — the Celeron 3765U supports 40% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The Celeron 3765U supports up to 16 GB of RAM compared to 4 GB — 120% more capacity for professional workloads. Memory channels: 2 (Celeron 3765U) vs 1 (Core 2 Solo SU3300). PCIe lanes: 12 (Celeron 3765U) vs 0 (Core 2 Solo SU3300) — the Celeron 3765U offers 12 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives.
| Feature | Celeron 3765U | Core 2 Solo SU3300 |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | FCBGA1168 | BGA956 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 3.0+173% | PCIe 1.1 |
| Max RAM Speed | DDR3L-1600+50% | DDR2-800 |
| Max RAM Capacity | 16 GB+300% | 4 GB |
| RAM Channels | 2+100% | 1 |
| ECC Support | ❌ | ❌ |
| PCIe Lanes | 12 | 0 |
Advanced Features
Neither processor supports overclocking. Virtualization support: VT-x, VT-d (Celeron 3765U) vs VT-x (Core 2 Solo SU3300). The Celeron 3765U includes integrated graphics (HD Graphics (Broadwell)), while the Core 2 Solo SU3300 requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Celeron 3765U targets Budget, Core 2 Solo SU3300 targets Mobile. Direct competitor: Celeron 3765U rivals Pentium 3825U.
| Feature | Celeron 3765U | Core 2 Solo SU3300 |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | Yes | No |
| IGPU Model | HD Graphics (Broadwell) | — |
| Unlocked | No | No |
| AVX-512 | No | No |
| Virtualization | VT-x, VT-d | 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 3765U and Core 2 Solo SU3300
