Celeron 5205U vs Celeron N2805

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 5205U vs Celeron N2805 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 5205U vs Celeron N2805: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

Celeron 5205U

2019

Why buy it

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

Trade-offs

❌275% higher power demand at 15W vs 4W.

Celeron N2805

2013

Why buy it

✅Draws 4W instead of 15W, a 11W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (1,430 vs 1,432).

Quick Answers

So, is Celeron 5205U better than Celeron N2805?

Yes. Celeron 5205U is the better all-around CPU here. It gives you a 2.7% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data, 0.1% 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 5205U is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 2.7% 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 5205U is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.1% better PassMark, backed by 2 cores and 2 threads.

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

Celeron 5205U still makes the most sense overall. Celeron 5205U comes in at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it still gives you a 2.7% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data.

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

Celeron 5205U makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2019 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 5205U vs Celeron N2805 Technical Specifications

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

Celeron 5205U

The Celeron 5205U is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 31 October 2019 (6 years ago). It is based on the Comet Lake-U (2019−2020) 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: 1 MB. Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: FCBGA1528. Thermal design power (TDP): 15 Watt. Memory support: DDR3, DDR4. Passmark benchmark score: 1,432 points. Launch price was $107.

Celeron N2805

The Celeron N2805 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 11 September 2013 (12 years ago). It is based on the Bay Trail-M (2013−2014) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 1.46 GHz, with boost up to 1.46 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 512K (per core). Built on 22 nm process technology. Socket: FCBGA1170. Thermal design power (TDP): 4.3 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 1,430 points. Launch price was $107.

⚡

Processing Power

Both the Celeron 5205U and Celeron N2805 share an identical 2-core/2-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 1.9 GHz on the Celeron 5205U versus 1.46 GHz on the Celeron N2805 — a 26.2% clock advantage for the Celeron 5205U (base: 1.9 GHz vs 1.46 GHz). The Celeron 5205U uses the Comet Lake-U (2019−2020) architecture (14 nm), while the Celeron N2805 uses Bay Trail-M (2013−2014) (22 nm). In PassMark, the Celeron 5205U scores 1,432 against the Celeron N2805's 1,430 — a 0.1% lead for the Celeron 5205U. L3 cache: 2 MB on the Celeron 5205U vs 0 kB on the Celeron N2805.

Feature	Celeron 5205U	Celeron N2805
Cores / Threads	2 / 2	2 / 2
Boost Clock	1.9 GHz+30%	1.46 GHz
Base Clock	1.9 GHz+30%	1.46 GHz
L3 Cache	2 MB	0 kB
L2 Cache	1 MB	512K (per core)+51100%
Process	14 nm-36%	22 nm
Architecture	Comet Lake-U (2019−2020)	Bay Trail-M (2013−2014)
PassMark	1,432	1,430
Geekbench 6 Single	385	—
Geekbench 6 Multi	650	—

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Celeron 5205U uses the FCBGA1528 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Celeron N2805 uses FCBGA1170 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR4-2400 on the Celeron 5205U versus 1066 on the Celeron N2805 — the Celeron 5205U supports 125.1% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The Celeron 5205U supports up to 64 GB of RAM compared to 4 GB — 1500% more capacity for professional workloads. Memory channels: 2 (Celeron 5205U) vs 1 (Celeron N2805). PCIe lanes: 12 (Celeron 5205U) vs 4 (Celeron N2805) — the Celeron 5205U offers 8 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: Comet Lake-U (Celeron 5205U) and FCBGA1170 (Celeron N2805).

Feature	Celeron 5205U	Celeron N2805
Socket	FCBGA1528	FCBGA1170
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0+50%	PCIe 2.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR4-2400+125%	1066
Max RAM Capacity	64 GB+1500%	4 GB
RAM Channels	2+100%	1
ECC Support	No	No
PCIe Lanes	12+200%	4

🔧

Advanced Features

Neither processor supports overclocking. Virtualization support: VT-x, VT-d (Celeron 5205U) vs true (Celeron N2805). Both include integrated graphics — UHD Graphics (Comet Lake) (Celeron 5205U) and Intel HD Graphics (Bay Trail) (Celeron N2805) — useful as a fallback for troubleshooting or display output without a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Celeron 5205U targets Budget. Direct competitor: Celeron 5205U rivals Pentium Gold 6405U; Celeron N2805 rivals AMD E1-2100.

Feature	Celeron 5205U	Celeron N2805
Integrated GPU	Yes	Yes
IGPU Model	UHD Graphics (Comet Lake)	Intel HD Graphics (Bay Trail)
Unlocked	No	No
AVX-512	No	No
Virtualization	VT-x, VT-d	true
Target Use	Budget	—