Celeron 847
VS
Core i3-330E

Celeron 847 vs Core i3-330E

Intel

Celeron 847

2 Cores2 Thrd17 WWMax: 1.1 GHz2011
VS
Intel

Core i3-330E

2 Cores4 Thrd35 WWMax: 0.03 GHz2010

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 847 is positioned at rank 1093 and the Core i3-330E is on rank 1157, so the Celeron 847 offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.

MSRP is the manufacturer's suggested retail price.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.

Performance Per Dollar Celeron 847

#1081
Atom x5-Z8300
MSRP: $20|Avg: N/A
3095%
#1082
Atom Z3735G
MSRP: $17|Avg: N/A
3050%
#1083
Core i5-480M
MSRP: $81|Avg: $77
2800%
#1084
Core i5-460M
MSRP: $80|Avg: $129
2787%
#1085
Core i5-2540M
MSRP: $266|Avg: $10
2761%
#1087
Core i5-450M
MSRP: $32|Avg: $31
2667%
#1088
Core i3-380M
MSRP: $49|Avg: $25
2557%
#1089
Core i5-430M
MSRP: N/A|Avg: $33
2553%
#1090
Core 2 Duo T6600
MSRP: N/A|Avg: $4
2484%
#1093
Celeron 847
MSRP: $134|Avg: $15
100%
#1094
Core i7-2630QM
MSRP: $378|Avg: N/A
99%
#1096
Core i7-2635QM
MSRP: $378|Avg: N/A
99%
#1097
Celeron 877
MSRP: $86|Avg: $15
99%
#1098
Celeron Dual-Core SU2300
MSRP: $134|Avg: $50
98%
#1099
Core i5-3337U
MSRP: $225|Avg: N/A
98%
#1100
Core i5-2450M
MSRP: $225|Avg: N/A
97%
#1101
Core i5-7Y54
MSRP: $281|Avg: $100
97%
#1102
Core i5-7Y57
MSRP: $281|Avg: $281
97%
#1104
Pentium 997
MSRP: $134|Avg: $10
96%
#1105
Pentium A1018
MSRP: $132|Avg: $15
95%
#1106
Core i5-2430M
MSRP: $225|Avg: N/A
95%
#1108
Pentium Dual Core T4500
MSRP: $150|Avg: $30
94%
Based on actual market prices and performance synthetic scores.

Performance Per Dollar Core i3-330E

#1145
Atom x5-Z8300
MSRP: $20|Avg: N/A
4121%
#1146
Atom Z3735G
MSRP: $17|Avg: N/A
4060%
#1147
Core i5-480M
MSRP: $81|Avg: $77
3728%
#1148
Core i5-460M
MSRP: $80|Avg: $129
3711%
#1149
Core i5-2540M
MSRP: $266|Avg: $10
3677%
#1151
Core i5-450M
MSRP: $32|Avg: $31
3551%
#1152
Core i3-380M
MSRP: $49|Avg: $25
3404%
#1153
Core i5-430M
MSRP: N/A|Avg: $33
3399%
#1154
Core 2 Duo T6600
MSRP: N/A|Avg: $4
3308%
#1157
Core i3-330E
MSRP: $177|Avg: $89
100%
#1159
Core i7-2640M
MSRP: $346|Avg: N/A
99%
#1160
Core M-5Y71
MSRP: $281|Avg: $281
99%
#1162
Core i7-2620M
MSRP: $346|Avg: N/A
98%
#1164
Celeron N3010
MSRP: $107|Avg: N/A
96%
#1165
Core i7-3537U
MSRP: $346|Avg: N/A
95%
#1166
Core M-5Y10c
MSRP: $281|Avg: $281
95%
#1167
Core M-5Y31
MSRP: $281|Avg: $30
95%
#1168
Core M-5Y10a
MSRP: $281|Avg: $281
95%
#1170
Celeron 1047UE
MSRP: $100|Avg: $100
95%
#1171
Core M-5Y70
MSRP: $281|Avg: $281
95%
#1172
Celeron U3400
MSRP: $86|Avg: $5
94%
Based on actual market prices and performance synthetic scores.

Performance Comparison

About PassMark

🏆 Chipversus Verdict

🚀 Performance Leadership

Performance Leadership: The Celeron 847 delivers superior performance across the board. It outperforms the Core i3-330E in both compute-intensive tasks (0.8% faster) and gaming workloads.
InsightCeleron 847Core i3-330E
Gaming
Superior gaming performance
Lower gaming performance
Workstation
Better multi-core power
Weaker in multi-core tasks
Price
More affordable ($15)
⚠️ Higher cost ($89)
Longevity
🛑 Legacy (Sandy Bridge (2011−2013) / 32 nm)
🛑 Legacy (Westmere (2010−2011) / 32 nm)

💎 Value Proposition

Efficiency: Even within a comparison of older hardware, the Celeron 847 stands out as the superior choice. It is effectively 83% cheaper ($15 vs $89) while identifying as the stronger performer.
InsightCeleron 847Core i3-330E
Cost Efficiency
Better overall value (+498%)
Lower cost efficiency
Upfront Cost
More affordable ($15)
⚠️ Higher cost ($89)

Performance Check

Paired with RTX 4090

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 847 and Core i3-330E

Intel

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.

Intel

Core i3-330E

The Core i3-330E is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 7 January 2010 (15 years ago). It is based on the Westmere (2010−2011) architecture. It features 2 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 2.13 GHz, with boost up to 0.03 GHz. L3 cache: 3 MB. L2 cache: 512 kB. Built on 32 nm process technology. Socket: BGA1288. Thermal design power (TDP): 35 Watt. Memory support: DDR3-800, DDR3-1066. Passmark benchmark score: 1,260 points. Launch price was $177.

Processing Power

The Celeron 847 packs 2 cores / 2 threads, matching the Core i3-330E's 2 cores. Boost clocks reach 1.1 GHz on the Celeron 847 versus 0.03 GHz on the Core i3-330E — a 189.4% clock advantage for the Celeron 847 (base: 1.1 GHz vs 2.13 GHz). The Celeron 847 uses the Sandy Bridge (2011−2013) architecture (32 nm), while the Core i3-330E uses Westmere (2010−2011) (32 nm). In PassMark, the Celeron 847 scores 1,270 against the Core i3-330E's 1,260 — a 0.8% lead for the Celeron 847. L3 cache: 2 MB (total) on the Celeron 847 vs 3 MB on the Core i3-330E.

FeatureCeleron 847Core i3-330E
Cores / Threads
2 / 2
2 / 4
Boost Clock
1.1 GHz+3567%
0.03 GHz
Base Clock
1.1 GHz
2.13 GHz+94%
L3 Cache
2 MB (total)
3 MB+50%
L2 Cache
256K (per core)
512 kB+100%
Process
32 nm
32 nm
Architecture
Sandy Bridge (2011−2013)
Westmere (2010−2011)
PassMark
1,270
1,260
Geekbench 6 Single
196
Geekbench 6 Multi
354
🧠

Memory & Platform

The Celeron 847 uses the BGA1023 socket (PCIe 2.0), while the Core i3-330E uses BGA1288 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.

FeatureCeleron 847Core i3-330E
Socket
BGA1023
BGA1288
PCIe Generation
PCIe 2.0
PCIe 2.0
Max RAM Speed
DDR3-1333
Max RAM Capacity
16 GB
RAM Channels
2
ECC Support
PCIe Lanes
16
🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization: VT-x (Celeron 847) / not specified (Core i3-330E). The Celeron 847 includes integrated graphics (HD Graphics (Sandy Bridge)), while the Core i3-330E requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Celeron 847 targets Budget. Direct competitor: Celeron 847 rivals Pentium 967.

FeatureCeleron 847Core i3-330E
Integrated GPU
Yes
IGPU Model
HD Graphics (Sandy Bridge)
Unlocked
No
AVX-512
No
Virtualization
VT-x
Target Use
Budget
💰

Value Analysis

The Celeron 847 launched at $134 MSRP, while the Core i3-330E debuted at $177. At current prices ($15 vs $89), the Celeron 847 is $74 cheaper. In terms of value (PassMark points per dollar), the Celeron 847 delivers 84.7 pts/$ vs 14.2 pts/$ for the Core i3-330E — making the Celeron 847 the 142.7% better value option.

FeatureCeleron 847Core i3-330E
MSRP
$134-24%
$177
Avg Price (30d)
$15-83%
$89
Performance per Dollar
84.7+496%
14.2
Release Date
2011
2010