Celeron 807 vs Opteron 148

Celeron 807 vs Opteron 148 Performance Spectrum

Celeron 807

1 / 2

535

0.0%

548

+2.4%

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 148 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 148: 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

✅Draws 17W instead of 85W, a 68W reduction.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with HD Graphics (Sandy Bridge), while Opteron 148 needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Opteron 148 across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (535 vs 548).
❌Launch MSRP is still $70 MSRP, while Opteron 148 mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.

Opteron 148

2005

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +8.8% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.

Trade-offs

❌400% higher power demand at 85W vs 17W.
❌No integrated graphics, while Celeron 807 can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Quick Answers

So, is Opteron 148 better than Celeron 807?

Not really, because they are built for different jobs. Opteron 148 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 gaming?

If gaming is the priority, Opteron 148 is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 8.8% 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, Opteron 148 is the stronger fit. You are getting 2.4% better PassMark, backed by 1 cores and 1 threads.

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

Opteron 148 is the easy recommendation for a fresh desktop build. Opteron 148 comes in at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus $70 MSRP, and it still gives you a 8.8% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. Celeron 807 only looks good on raw value math because it is a cheap legacy laptop chip, not because it is a real desktop gaming recommendation. It simply does not keep up in modern games, especially when the gap is already 8.8% in the shared gaming data.

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 2005). That makes it the safer long-term bet.

Celeron 807 vs Opteron 148 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 148

The Opteron 148 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 2015-01-01. It is based on the SledgeHammer (2003−2005) architecture. It features 1 cores and 1 threads. Base frequency is 2.2 GHz, with boost up to 2.2 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 1 MB. Built on 130 nm process technology. Socket: 939. Thermal design power (TDP): 85 Watt. Memory support: DDR1. Passmark benchmark score: 548 points. Launch price was $800.

⚡

Processing Power

The Celeron 807 packs 1 cores / 2 threads, matching the Opteron 148's 1 cores. Boost clocks reach 1.5 GHz on the Celeron 807 versus 2.2 GHz on the Opteron 148 — a 37.8% clock advantage for the Opteron 148 (base: 1.5 GHz vs 2.2 GHz). The Celeron 807 uses the Sandy Bridge (2011−2013) architecture (32 nm), while the Opteron 148 uses SledgeHammer (2003−2005) (130 nm). In PassMark, the Celeron 807 scores 535 against the Opteron 148's 548 — a 2.4% lead for the Opteron 148. L3 cache: 1.5 MB (total) on the Celeron 807 vs 0 kB on the Opteron 148.

Feature	Celeron 807	Opteron 148
Cores / Threads	1 / 2	1 / 1
Boost Clock	1.5 GHz	2.2 GHz+47%
Base Clock	1.5 GHz	2.2 GHz+47%
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	548+2%

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Celeron 807 uses the BGA1023 socket (PCIe 2.0), while the Opteron 148 uses 939 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.

Feature	Celeron 807	Opteron 148
Socket	BGA1023	939
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 148). The Celeron 807 includes integrated graphics (HD Graphics (Sandy Bridge)), while the Opteron 148 requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Celeron 807 targets Mobile.