Celeron 857 vs Celeron N3010
Celeron 857
Celeron N3010
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 857 is positioned at rank 1201 and the Celeron N3010 is on rank 1164, so the Celeron N3010 offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar Celeron 857
Performance Per Dollar Celeron N3010
Performance Comparison
About PassMark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
| Insight | Celeron 857 | Celeron N3010 |
|---|---|---|
| Gaming | ❌ Lower gaming performance | ✅ Superior gaming performance |
| Workstation | ❌ Weaker in multi-core tasks | ✅ Better multi-core power |
| Price | ✅ More affordable ($10) | ⚠️ Higher cost ($107) |
| Longevity | 🛑 Legacy (Sandy Bridge (2011−2013) / 32 nm) | 🛑 Legacy (Airmont (2016) / 14 nm) |
💎 Value Proposition
| Insight | Celeron 857 | Celeron N3010 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ✅ Better overall value (+926%) | ❌ Lower cost efficiency |
| Upfront Cost | ✅ More affordable ($10) | ⚠️ Higher cost ($107) |
Performance Check
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 857 and Celeron N3010
Celeron 857
The Celeron 857 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 1 July 2011 (14 years ago). It is based on the Sandy Bridge (2011−2013) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 1.2 GHz, with boost up to 1.2 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: 705 points. Launch price was $134.
Celeron N3010
The Celeron N3010 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 10 January 2016 (9 years ago). It is based on the Airmont (2016) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 1.04 GHz, with boost up to 2.24 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 1 MB. Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: FCBGA1170. Thermal design power (TDP): 4 Watt. Memory support: DDR3L-1600. Passmark benchmark score: 735 points. Launch price was $107.
Processing Power
Both the Celeron 857 and Celeron N3010 share an identical 2-core/2-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 1.2 GHz on the Celeron 857 versus 2.24 GHz on the Celeron N3010 — a 60.5% clock advantage for the Celeron N3010 (base: 1.2 GHz vs 1.04 GHz). The Celeron 857 uses the Sandy Bridge (2011−2013) architecture (32 nm), while the Celeron N3010 uses Airmont (2016) (14 nm). In PassMark, the Celeron 857 scores 705 against the Celeron N3010's 735 — a 4.2% lead for the Celeron N3010. L3 cache: 2 MB (total) on the Celeron 857 vs 0 kB on the Celeron N3010.
| Feature | Celeron 857 | Celeron N3010 |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 2 / 2 | 2 / 2 |
| Boost Clock | 1.2 GHz | 2.24 GHz+87% |
| Base Clock | 1.2 GHz+15% | 1.04 GHz |
| L3 Cache | 2 MB (total) | 0 kB |
| L2 Cache | 256K (per core) | 1 MB+300% |
| Process | 32 nm | 14 nm-56% |
| Architecture | Sandy Bridge (2011−2013) | Airmont (2016) |
| PassMark | 705 | 735+4% |
Memory & Platform
The Celeron 857 uses the BGA1023 socket (PCIe 2.0), while the Celeron N3010 uses FCBGA1170 (PCIe 3.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR3-1333 on the Celeron 857 versus 1600 on the Celeron N3010 — the Celeron N3010 supports 199.3% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The Celeron 857 supports up to 16 GB of RAM compared to 8 — 66.7% more capacity for professional workloads. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. PCIe lanes: 16 (Celeron 857) vs 4 (Celeron N3010) — the Celeron 857 offers 12 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: HM65,HM67 (Celeron 857) and Braswell (Celeron N3010).
| Feature | Celeron 857 | Celeron N3010 |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | BGA1023 | FCBGA1170 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 2.0 | PCIe 3.0+50% |
| Max RAM Speed | DDR3-1333 | 1600+53233% |
| Max RAM Capacity | 16 GB+209715100% | 8 |
| RAM Channels | 2 | 2 |
| ECC Support | ❌ | ❌ |
| PCIe Lanes | 16+300% | 4 |
Advanced Features
Virtualization support: VT-x (Celeron 857) vs true (Celeron N3010). Both include integrated graphics — HD Graphics (Sandy Bridge) (Celeron 857) and Intel HD Graphics 400 (Celeron N3010) — useful as a fallback for troubleshooting or display output without a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Celeron 857 targets Budget, Celeron N3010 targets Budget Mobile. Direct competitor: Celeron 857 rivals Pentium 967.
| Feature | Celeron 857 | Celeron N3010 |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | Yes | Yes |
| IGPU Model | HD Graphics (Sandy Bridge) | Intel HD Graphics 400 |
| Unlocked | No | — |
| AVX-512 | No | No |
| Virtualization | VT-x | true |
| Target Use | Budget | Budget Mobile |
Value Analysis
The Celeron 857 launched at $134 MSRP, while the Celeron N3010 debuted at $107.
| Feature | Celeron 857 | Celeron N3010 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $134 | $107-20% |
| Avg Price (30d) | $10 | — |
| Release Date | 2011 | 2016 |
Top Performing CPUs
The most powerful cpus ranked by PassMark CPU Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar CPU comparisons based on Celeron 857 and Celeron N3010
