Celeron 807 vs Celeron 925

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 807 vs Celeron 925 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 807 vs Celeron 925: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

Celeron 807

2012

Why buy it

✅+50% larger total L3 cache (1.5 MB vs 1 MB).
✅Costs $30 less on MSRP ($70 MSRP vs $100 MSRP).
✅Delivers 45.6% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 7.6 vs 5.3 PassMark/$ ($70 MSRP vs $100 MSRP).
✅Draws 17W instead of 35W, a 18W reduction.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with HD Graphics (Sandy Bridge), while Celeron 925 needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

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

Celeron 925

2011

Why buy it

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (525 vs 535).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (1 MB vs 1.5 MB).
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 5.3 vs 7.6 PassMark/$ ($100 MSRP vs $70 MSRP).
❌105.9% higher power demand at 35W vs 17W.
❌No integrated graphics, while Celeron 807 can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Quick Answers

So, is Celeron 807 better than Celeron 925?

Yes. Celeron 807 is the better all-around CPU here. It gives you a 1.1% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data, 1.9% 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 807 is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 1.1% 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 807 is the stronger fit. You are getting 1.9% better PassMark, backed by 1 cores and 2 threads. It also has the larger cache pool with 50% larger total L3 cache (1.5 MB vs 1 MB).

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

Celeron 807 is the better buy right now. Celeron 807 comes in $30 cheaper on MSRP at $70 MSRP versus $100 MSRP, and it still gives you a 1.1% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. It is also 45.6% better value on MSRP (7.6 vs 5.3 PassMark/$), 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 807 makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2012 vs 2011) and 50% larger total L3 cache (1.5 MB vs 1 MB). That extra compute headroom is more likely to matter as games, background tasks, and creator workloads get heavier.

Celeron 807 vs Celeron 925 Technical Specifications

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

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.

Celeron 925

The Celeron 925 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 2007-01-01. Base frequency: 2.3 GHz. L3 cache: 1 MB L2 Cache. Built on 45 nm process technology. Thermal design power (TDP): 35 Watt. Passmark benchmark score: 525 points. Launch price was $69.

⚡

Processing Power

The Celeron 807 is built on the Sandy Bridge (2011−2013) architecture. In PassMark, the Celeron 807 scores 535 against the Celeron 925's 525 — a 1.9% lead for the Celeron 807. L3 cache: 1.5 MB (total) on the Celeron 807 vs 1 MB L2 Cache on the Celeron 925.

Feature	Celeron 807	Celeron 925
Cores / Threads	1 / 2	—
Boost Clock	1.5 GHz	—
Base Clock	1.5 GHz	2.3 GHz+53%
L3 Cache	1.5 MB (total)+50%	1 MB L2 Cache
L2 Cache	256K (per core)	—
Process	32 nm-29%	45 nm
Architecture	Sandy Bridge (2011−2013)	—
PassMark	535+2%	525

🧠

Memory & Platform

Both support up to DDR3-1333 memory speed. The Celeron 807 supports up to 16 GB of RAM compared to 4 GB — 300% more capacity for professional workloads. Memory channels: 2 (Celeron 807) vs 1 (Celeron 925). Both provide 0 PCIe lanes. Chipset compatibility: QM67,QS67,HM67,HM65 (Celeron 807) and GL40,GM45 (Celeron 925).

Feature	Celeron 807	Celeron 925
Socket	BGA1023	—
PCIe Generation	PCIe 2.0	PCIe 2.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR3-1333	DDR3-1333
Max RAM Capacity	16 GB+300%	4 GB
RAM Channels	2+100%	1
ECC Support	No	No
PCIe Lanes	0	0

🔧

Advanced Features

Neither processor supports overclocking. Virtualization support: VT-x (Celeron 807) vs No (Celeron 925). The Celeron 807 includes integrated graphics (HD Graphics (Sandy Bridge)), while the Celeron 925 requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Celeron 807 targets Mobile, Celeron 925 targets Budget. Direct competitor: Celeron 925 rivals Pentium 4 2.80.

Feature	Celeron 807	Celeron 925
Integrated GPU	Yes	No
IGPU Model	HD Graphics (Sandy Bridge)	—
Unlocked	No	No
AVX-512	No	No
Virtualization	VT-x	No
Target Use	Mobile	Budget

💰

Value Analysis

At launch, the Celeron 807 was priced at $70, while the Celeron 925 came in at $100. On launch pricing ($70 vs $100), Celeron 807 was $30 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Celeron 807 delivers 7.6 pts/$ vs 5.3 pts/$ for the Celeron 925 — making the Celeron 807 the 37.1% better value option.

Feature	Celeron 807	Celeron 925
MSRP	$70-30%	$100
Performance per Dollar	7.6+43%	5.3
Release Date	2012	2011

Search Celeron 807 on Amazon

Search Celeron 925 on Amazon

Affiliate Disclosure

ChipVERSUS is a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to Amazon.com. We may earn a commission on qualifying purchases made through our links. This comes at no additional cost to you and helps support our work in providing comprehensive PC building guides and tools.

Amazon and the Amazon logo are trademarks of Amazon.com, Inc. or its affiliates.