CPU
GPU
Celeron 807
Atom E3826
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 807 is positioned at rank 1141 and the Atom E3826 is on rank 922, so the Atom E3826 offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar Celeron 807
Performance Per Dollar Atom E3826
Performance Comparison
About PassMark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
| Insight | Celeron 807 | Atom E3826 |
|---|---|---|
| Gaming | ✅ Superior gaming performance | ❌ Lower gaming performance |
| Workstation | ❌ Weaker in multi-core tasks | ✅ Better multi-core power |
| Price | ⚠️ Higher cost ($10) | ✅ More affordable ($0) |
| Longevity | 🛑 Legacy (Sandy Bridge (2011−2013) / 32 nm) | 🛑 Legacy (Bay Trail-I (2013) / 22 nm) |
💎 Value Proposition
| Insight | Celeron 807 | Atom E3826 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ❌ Lower cost efficiency | ❌ Lower cost efficiency |
| Upfront Cost | ⚠️ Higher cost ($10) | ✅ More affordable ($0) |
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.
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of Celeron 807 and Atom E3826
Celeron 807
The Celeron 807 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 1 July 2012 (13 years ago). It is based on the Sandy Bridge (2011−2013) architecture. It features 1 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 1.5 GHz, with boost up to 1.5 GHz. L3 cache: 1.5 MB (total). L2 cache: 256K (per core). Built on 32 nm process technology. Socket: BGA1023. Thermal design power (TDP): 17 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 535 points. Launch price was $70.
Atom E3826
The Atom E3826 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 8 October 2013 (12 years ago). It is based on the Bay Trail-I (2013) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Max frequency: 1.47 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 512 kB (per core). Built on 22 nm process technology. Socket: FCBGA1170. Thermal design power (TDP): 7 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 545 points. Launch price was $69.
Processing Power
The Celeron 807 packs 1 cores / 2 threads, while the Atom E3826 offers 2 cores / 2 threads — the Atom E3826 has 1 more core. Boost clocks reach 1.5 GHz on the Celeron 807 versus 1.47 GHz on the Atom E3826 — a 2% clock advantage for the Celeron 807. The Celeron 807 uses the Sandy Bridge (2011−2013) architecture (32 nm), while the Atom E3826 uses Bay Trail-I (2013) (22 nm). In PassMark, the Celeron 807 scores 535 against the Atom E3826's 545 — a 1.9% lead for the Atom E3826. L3 cache: 1.5 MB (total) on the Celeron 807 vs 0 kB on the Atom E3826.
| Feature | Celeron 807 | Atom E3826 |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 1 / 2 | 2 / 2+100% |
| Boost Clock | 1.5 GHz+2% | 1.47 GHz |
| Base Clock | 1.5 GHz | — |
| L3 Cache | 1.5 MB (total) | 0 kB |
| L2 Cache | 256K (per core) | 512 kB (per core)+100% |
| Process | 32 nm | 22 nm-31% |
| Architecture | Sandy Bridge (2011−2013) | Bay Trail-I (2013) |
| PassMark | 535 | 545+2% |
Memory & Platform
The Celeron 807 uses the BGA1023 socket (PCIe 2.0), while the Atom E3826 uses FCBGA1170 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Both support up to DDR3-1333 memory speed. The Celeron 807 supports up to 16 GB of RAM compared to 8 GB — 66.7% more capacity for professional workloads. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. PCIe lanes: 0 (Celeron 807) vs 4 (Atom E3826) — the Atom E3826 offers 4 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: QM67,QS67,HM67,HM65 (Celeron 807) and Intel FCBGA1170 (Atom E3826).
| Feature | Celeron 807 | Atom E3826 |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | BGA1023 | FCBGA1170 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 2.0 | PCIe 2.0 |
| Max RAM Speed | DDR3-1333 | DDR3L-1066 |
| Max RAM Capacity | 16 GB+100% | 8 GB |
| RAM Channels | 2 | 2 |
| ECC Support | ❌ | ✅ |
| PCIe Lanes | 0 | 4 |
Advanced Features
Virtualization: VT-x (Celeron 807) / not specified (Atom E3826). Both include integrated graphics — HD Graphics (Sandy Bridge) (Celeron 807) and Intel HD Graphics (Bay Trail) (Atom E3826) — useful as a fallback for troubleshooting or display output without a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Celeron 807 targets Mobile.
| Feature | Celeron 807 | Atom E3826 |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | Yes | Yes |
| IGPU Model | HD Graphics (Sandy Bridge) | Intel HD Graphics (Bay Trail) |
| Unlocked | No | — |
| AVX-512 | No | — |
| Virtualization | VT-x | — |
| Target Use | 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 807 and Atom E3826
