Celeron 807 vs Opteron 146

Celeron 807 vs Opteron 146 Performance Spectrum

Celeron 807

1 / 2

535

+5.9%

505

0.0%

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3955WX

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7955WX

Ryzen Threadripper 3990X

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.

Celeron 807 vs Opteron 146 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 Opteron 146: 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

✅+5.9% higher PassMark.
✅Draws 17W instead of 89W, a 72W reduction.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with HD Graphics (Sandy Bridge), while Opteron 146 needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌Launch MSRP is still $70 MSRP, while Opteron 146 mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.

Opteron 146

2003

Why buy it

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (505 vs 535).
❌423.5% higher power demand at 89W 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 Opteron 146?

Not really, because they are built for different jobs. Opteron 146 makes more sense for workstation-style multi-core throughput, while Celeron 807 is the more practical desktop choice for gaming, platform cost, and everyday use.

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 5.9% better PassMark, backed by 1 cores and 2 threads.

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

Celeron 807 is the better buy right now. Celeron 807 comes in at an unclear MSRP at $70 MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it still gives you 5.9% better PassMark. The compromise is that Opteron 146 is still the better pure gaming CPU with a 1.3% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. It is also 100.0% better value on MSRP (7.6 vs 0.0 PassMark/$), 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 807 makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2012 vs 2003) and more multi-core headroom with 1 cores / 2 threads instead of 1/1. That extra compute headroom is more likely to matter as games, background tasks, and creator workloads get heavier.

Celeron 807 vs Opteron 146 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.

Opteron 146

The Opteron 146 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in Setembro 2003 (22 years ago). It is based on the SledgeHammer (2003−2005) architecture. It features 1 cores and 1 threads. Max frequency: 2 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 1 MB. Built on 130 nm process technology. Socket: 940. Thermal design power (TDP): 89 Watt. Passmark benchmark score: 505 points. Launch price was $60.

⚡

Processing Power

The Celeron 807 packs 1 cores / 2 threads, matching the Opteron 146's 1 cores. Boost clocks reach 1.5 GHz on the Celeron 807 versus 2 GHz on the Opteron 146 — a 28.6% clock advantage for the Opteron 146. The Celeron 807 uses the Sandy Bridge (2011−2013) architecture (32 nm), while the Opteron 146 uses SledgeHammer (2003−2005) (130 nm). In PassMark, the Celeron 807 scores 535 against the Opteron 146's 505 — a 5.8% lead for the Celeron 807. L3 cache: 1.5 MB (total) on the Celeron 807 vs 0 kB on the Opteron 146.

Feature	Celeron 807	Opteron 146
Cores / Threads	1 / 2	1 / 1
Boost Clock	1.5 GHz	2 GHz+33%
Base Clock	1.5 GHz	—
L3 Cache	1.5 MB (total)	0 kB
L2 Cache	256K (per core)+25500%	1 MB
Process	32 nm-75%	130 nm
Architecture	Sandy Bridge (2011−2013)	SledgeHammer (2003−2005)
PassMark	535+6%	505

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Celeron 807 uses the BGA1023 socket (PCIe 2.0), while the Opteron 146 uses 940 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.

Feature	Celeron 807	Opteron 146
Socket	BGA1023	940
PCIe Generation	PCIe 2.0	PCIe 2.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR3-1333	—
Max RAM Capacity	16 GB	—
RAM Channels	2	—
ECC Support	No	—
PCIe Lanes	0	—

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization: VT-x (Celeron 807) / not specified (Opteron 146). The Celeron 807 includes integrated graphics (HD Graphics (Sandy Bridge)), while the Opteron 146 requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Celeron 807 targets Mobile.