Celeron 857 vs Opteron 254
Celeron 857
Opteron 254
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 Opteron 254 is on rank 658, so the Opteron 254 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 Opteron 254
Performance Comparison
About PassMark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
| Insight | Celeron 857 | Opteron 254 |
|---|---|---|
| Gaming | ❌ Lower gaming performance | ✅ Superior gaming performance |
| Workstation | ✅ Better multi-core power | ❌ Weaker in multi-core tasks |
| Price | ⚠️ Higher cost ($10) | ✅ More affordable ($0) |
| Longevity | 🛑 Legacy (Sandy Bridge (2011−2013) / 32 nm) | 🛑 Legacy (Troy (2005) / 90 nm) |
💎 Value Proposition
| Insight | Celeron 857 | Opteron 254 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ❌ Lower cost efficiency | ❌ Lower cost efficiency |
| Upfront Cost | ⚠️ Higher cost ($10) | ✅ More affordable ($0) |
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 Opteron 254
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.
Opteron 254
The Opteron 254 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 2015-01-01. It is based on the Troy (2005) architecture. It features 1 cores and 1 threads. Max frequency: 2.8 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 1 MB. Built on 90 nm process technology. Socket: 940. Thermal design power (TDP): 92 Watt. Passmark benchmark score: 690 points. Launch price was $800.
Processing Power
The Celeron 857 packs 2 cores / 2 threads, while the Opteron 254 offers 1 cores / 1 threads — the Celeron 857 has 1 more core. Boost clocks reach 1.2 GHz on the Celeron 857 versus 2.8 GHz on the Opteron 254 — a 80% clock advantage for the Opteron 254. The Celeron 857 uses the Sandy Bridge (2011−2013) architecture (32 nm), while the Opteron 254 uses Troy (2005) (90 nm). In PassMark, the Celeron 857 scores 705 against the Opteron 254's 690 — a 2.2% lead for the Celeron 857. L3 cache: 2 MB (total) on the Celeron 857 vs 0 kB on the Opteron 254.
| Feature | Celeron 857 | Opteron 254 |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 2 / 2+100% | 1 / 1 |
| Boost Clock | 1.2 GHz | 2.8 GHz+133% |
| Base Clock | 1.2 GHz | — |
| L3 Cache | 2 MB (total) | 0 kB |
| L2 Cache | 256K (per core) | 1 MB+300% |
| Process | 32 nm-64% | 90 nm |
| Architecture | Sandy Bridge (2011−2013) | Troy (2005) |
| PassMark | 705+2% | 690 |
Memory & Platform
The Celeron 857 uses the BGA1023 socket (PCIe 2.0), while the Opteron 254 uses 940 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.
| Feature | Celeron 857 | Opteron 254 |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | BGA1023 | 940 |
| 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 857) / not specified (Opteron 254). The Celeron 857 includes integrated graphics (HD Graphics (Sandy Bridge)), while the Opteron 254 requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Celeron 857 targets Budget. Direct competitor: Celeron 857 rivals Pentium 967.
| Feature | Celeron 857 | Opteron 254 |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | Yes | — |
| IGPU Model | HD Graphics (Sandy Bridge) | — |
| Unlocked | No | — |
| AVX-512 | No | — |
| Virtualization | VT-x | — |
| Target Use | Budget | — |
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 Opteron 254
