Celeron 847 vs Phenom II X2 B57

Celeron 847 vs Phenom II X2 B57 Performance Spectrum

Celeron 847

2 / 2

1,270

+0.8%

Celeron N3000

Pentium T3400

Pentium Dual-Core E2200

1,260

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 847 vs Phenom II X2 B57 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 Phenom II X2 B57: 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

✅+0.8% higher PassMark.
✅Draws 17W instead of 80W, a 63W reduction.
✅100+% more PCIe lanes (16 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with HD Graphics (Sandy Bridge), while Phenom II X2 B57 needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌Smaller total L3 cache (2 MB vs 6 MB).
❌Launch MSRP is still $134 MSRP, while Phenom II X2 B57 mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.

Phenom II X2 B57

2010

Why buy it

✅+200% larger total L3 cache (6 MB vs 2 MB).

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (1,260 vs 1,270).
❌370.6% higher power demand at 80W vs 17W.
❌No integrated graphics, while Celeron 847 can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Quick Answers

So, is Celeron 847 better than Phenom II X2 B57?

It depends on what you want from the system. For gaming, Phenom II X2 B57 is ahead with a 0.1% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. For rendering, compiling, streaming, and heavier multitasking, Celeron 847 pulls ahead with 0.8% better PassMark. Phenom II X2 B57 also has the bigger cache pool with 200% larger total L3 cache (6 MB vs 2 MB).

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 0.8% better PassMark, backed by 2 cores and 2 threads.

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

Celeron 847 is the better buy right now. Celeron 847 comes in at an unclear MSRP at $134 MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it still gives you 0.8% better PassMark. The compromise is that Phenom II X2 B57 is still the better pure gaming CPU with a 0.1% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. It is also 100.0% better value on MSRP (9.5 vs 0.0 PassMark/$), 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 847 makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2011 vs 2010) and more multi-core headroom with 2 cores / 2 threads instead of 2/2. That extra compute headroom is more likely to matter as games, background tasks, and creator workloads get heavier.

Celeron 847 vs Phenom II X2 B57 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.

Phenom II X2 B57

The Phenom II X2 B57 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 2009-01-01. It is based on the Callisto (2009−2010) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 3.2 GHz, with boost up to 3.2 GHz. L3 cache: 6 MB (total). L2 cache: 512 kB (per core). Built on 45 nm process technology. Socket: AM3. Thermal design power (TDP): 80 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 1,260 points. Launch price was $149.

⚡

Processing Power

Both the Celeron 847 and Phenom II X2 B57 share an identical 2-core/2-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 1.1 GHz on the Celeron 847 versus 3.2 GHz on the Phenom II X2 B57 — a 97.7% clock advantage for the Phenom II X2 B57 (base: 1.1 GHz vs 3.2 GHz). The Celeron 847 uses the Sandy Bridge (2011−2013) architecture (32 nm), while the Phenom II X2 B57 uses Callisto (2009−2010) (45 nm). In PassMark, the Celeron 847 scores 1,270 against the Phenom II X2 B57's 1,260 — a 0.8% lead for the Celeron 847. L3 cache: 2 MB (total) on the Celeron 847 vs 6 MB (total) on the Phenom II X2 B57.

Feature	Celeron 847	Phenom II X2 B57
Cores / Threads	2 / 2	2 / 2
Boost Clock	1.1 GHz	3.2 GHz+191%
Base Clock	1.1 GHz	3.2 GHz+191%
L3 Cache	2 MB (total)	6 MB (total)+200%
L2 Cache	256K (per core)	512 kB (per core)+100%
Process	32 nm-29%	45 nm
Architecture	Sandy Bridge (2011−2013)	Callisto (2009−2010)
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 Phenom II X2 B57 uses AM3 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.

Feature	Celeron 847	Phenom II X2 B57
Socket	BGA1023	AM3
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	16	—

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization: VT-x (Celeron 847) / not specified (Phenom II X2 B57). The Celeron 847 includes integrated graphics (HD Graphics (Sandy Bridge)), while the Phenom II X2 B57 requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Celeron 847 targets Budget. Direct competitor: Celeron 847 rivals Pentium 967.