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 847 vs Celeron N3060 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 847 vs Celeron N3060: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

Celeron 847

2011

Why buy it

✅+0.2% higher PassMark.
✅300% more PCIe lanes (16 vs 4) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 9.5 vs 11.8 PassMark/$ ($134 MSRP vs $107 MSRP).
❌183.3% higher power demand at 17W vs 6W.

Celeron N3060

2016

Why buy it

✅Costs $27 less on MSRP ($107 MSRP vs $134 MSRP).
✅Delivers 24.9% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 11.8 vs 9.5 PassMark/$ ($107 MSRP vs $134 MSRP).
✅Draws 6W instead of 17W, a 11W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (1,267 vs 1,270).

Quick Answers

So, is Celeron N3060 better than Celeron 847?

It depends on what you want from the system. For gaming, Celeron N3060 is ahead with a 1.8% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. For rendering, compiling, streaming, and heavier multitasking, Celeron 847 pulls ahead with 0.2% better PassMark.

Which one is better for streaming, content creation, and heavy multitasking?

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Celeron 847 is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.2% better PassMark, backed by 2 cores and 2 threads.

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

Celeron N3060 is the better buy right now. Celeron N3060 comes in $27 cheaper on MSRP at $107 MSRP versus $134 MSRP, and it still gives you a 1.8% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. The compromise is that Celeron 847 is still stronger for heavier multi-core work with 0.2% better PassMark. It is also 24.9% better value on MSRP (11.8 vs 9.5 PassMark/$), 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 N3060 makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2016 vs 2011). That makes it the safer long-term bet.

Celeron 847 vs Celeron N3060 Technical Specifications

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

Celeron 847

The Celeron 847 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 19 June 2011 (14 years ago). It is based on the Sandy Bridge (2011−2013) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 1.1 GHz, with boost up to 1.1 GHz. L3 cache: 2 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: 1,270 points. Launch price was $134.

Celeron N3060

The Celeron N3060 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 15 January 2016 (9 years ago). It is based on the Braswell (2015−2016) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 1.6 GHz, with boost up to 2.48 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 1 MB. Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: FCBGA1170. Thermal design power (TDP): 6 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 1,267 points. Launch price was $107.

⚡

Processing Power

Both the Celeron 847 and Celeron N3060 share an identical 2-core/2-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 1.1 GHz on the Celeron 847 versus 2.48 GHz on the Celeron N3060 — a 77.1% clock advantage for the Celeron N3060 (base: 1.1 GHz vs 1.6 GHz). The Celeron 847 uses the Sandy Bridge (2011−2013) architecture (32 nm), while the Celeron N3060 uses Braswell (2015−2016) (14 nm). In PassMark, the Celeron 847 scores 1,270 against the Celeron N3060's 1,267 — a 0.2% lead for the Celeron 847. L3 cache: 2 MB (total) on the Celeron 847 vs 0 kB on the Celeron N3060.

Feature	Celeron 847	Celeron N3060
Cores / Threads	2 / 2	2 / 2
Boost Clock	1.1 GHz	2.48 GHz+125%
Base Clock	1.1 GHz	1.6 GHz+45%
L3 Cache	2 MB (total)	0 kB
L2 Cache	256K (per core)+25500%	1 MB
Process	32 nm	14 nm-56%
Architecture	Sandy Bridge (2011−2013)	Braswell (2015−2016)
PassMark	1,270	1,267
Geekbench 6 Single	196	—
Geekbench 6 Multi	354	—

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Celeron 847 uses the BGA1023 socket (PCIe 2.0), while the Celeron N3060 uses FCBGA1170 (PCIe 3.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR3-1333 on the Celeron 847 versus 1600 on the Celeron N3060 — the Celeron N3060 supports 20% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The Celeron 847 supports up to 16 GB of RAM compared to 8 GB — 100% more capacity for professional workloads. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. PCIe lanes: 16 (Celeron 847) vs 4 (Celeron N3060) — the Celeron 847 offers 12 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: HM65,HM67 (Celeron 847) and FCBGA1170 (Celeron N3060).

Feature	Celeron 847	Celeron N3060
Socket	BGA1023	FCBGA1170
PCIe Generation	PCIe 2.0	PCIe 3.0+50%
Max RAM Speed	DDR3-1333	1600+20%
Max RAM Capacity	16 GB+100%	8 GB
RAM Channels	2	2
ECC Support	No	No
PCIe Lanes	16+300%	4

🔧

Advanced Features

Neither processor supports overclocking. Virtualization support: VT-x (Celeron 847) vs true (Celeron N3060). Both include integrated graphics — HD Graphics (Sandy Bridge) (Celeron 847) and Intel HD Graphics 400 (Celeron N3060) — useful as a fallback for troubleshooting or display output without a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Celeron 847 targets Budget. Direct competitor: Celeron 847 rivals Pentium 967; Celeron N3060 rivals AMD E2-9010.

Feature	Celeron 847	Celeron N3060
Integrated GPU	Yes	Yes
IGPU Model	HD Graphics (Sandy Bridge)	Intel HD Graphics 400
Unlocked	No	No
AVX-512	No	No
Virtualization	VT-x	true
Target Use	Budget	—

💰

Value Analysis

At launch, the Celeron 847 was priced at $134, while the Celeron N3060 came in at $107. On launch pricing ($134 vs $107), Celeron N3060 was $27 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Celeron 847 delivers 9.5 pts/$ vs 11.8 pts/$ for the Celeron N3060 — making the Celeron N3060 the 22.2% better value option.

Feature	Celeron 847	Celeron N3060
MSRP	$134	$107-20%
Performance per Dollar	9.5	11.8+24%
Release Date	2011	2016

Search Celeron 847 on Amazon

Search Celeron N3060 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.