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 925 vs Celeron SU2300 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 925 vs Celeron SU2300: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

Celeron 925

2011

Why buy it

✅Costs $34 less on MSRP ($100 MSRP vs $134 MSRP).
✅Delivers 29.1% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 5.3 vs 4.1 PassMark/$ ($100 MSRP vs $134 MSRP).

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Celeron SU2300 across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (525 vs 545).
❌250% higher power demand at 35W vs 10W.

Celeron SU2300

2009

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +7.6% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Draws 10W instead of 35W, a 25W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 4.1 vs 5.3 PassMark/$ ($134 MSRP vs $100 MSRP).

Quick Answers

So, is Celeron SU2300 better than Celeron 925?

Yes. Celeron SU2300 is the better all-around CPU here. It gives you a 7.6% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data and 3.8% better PassMark, which is enough to make it the stronger overall pick.

Which one is better for gaming?

If gaming is the priority, Celeron SU2300 is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 7.6% more average FPS across 50 shared CPU game tests.

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Celeron SU2300 is the stronger fit. You are getting 3.8% better PassMark.

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

Celeron SU2300 is still the much better call for a fresh build. Celeron SU2300 comes in 34.0% more expensive on MSRP at $134 MSRP versus $100 MSRP, and it still gives you a 7.6% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. Celeron 925 only looks stronger on raw value math because it is extremely cheap, but that usually means used-market pricing on an obsolete 2011 platform. Even with 29.1% better value on paper (5.3 vs 4.1 PassMark/$), it really only makes sense as a cheap stopgap or a niche existing-platform option for someone already on that older platform.

Which one is more future-proof for 2026 and beyond?

Celeron 925 makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2011 vs 2009). That makes it the safer long-term bet.

Celeron 925 vs Celeron SU2300 Technical Specifications

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

Celeron 925

The Celeron 925 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 2007-01-01. Base frequency: 2.3 GHz. L3 cache: 1 MB L2 Cache. Built on 45 nm process technology. Thermal design power (TDP): 35 Watt. Passmark benchmark score: 525 points. Launch price was $69.

Celeron SU2300

The Celeron SU2300 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 2007-01-01. Base frequency: 1.2 GHz. L3 cache: 1 MB. Built on 45 nm process technology. Socket: BGA956. Thermal design power (TDP): 10 Watt. Passmark benchmark score: 545 points. Launch price was $69.

⚡

Processing Power

In PassMark, the Celeron 925 scores 525 against the Celeron SU2300's 545 — a 3.7% lead for the Celeron SU2300. L3 cache: 1 MB L2 Cache on the Celeron 925 vs 1 MB on the Celeron SU2300.

Feature	Celeron 925	Celeron SU2300
Base Clock	2.3 GHz+92%	1.2 GHz
L3 Cache	1 MB L2 Cache	1 MB
Process	45 nm	45 nm
PassMark	525	545+4%

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization: No (Celeron 925) / not specified (Celeron SU2300). Primary use case: Celeron 925 targets Budget. Direct competitor: Celeron 925 rivals Pentium 4 2.80.

Feature	Celeron 925	Celeron SU2300
Integrated GPU	No	—
Unlocked	No	—
AVX-512	No	—
Virtualization	No	—
Target Use	Budget	—

💰

Value Analysis

At launch, the Celeron 925 was priced at $100, while the Celeron SU2300 came in at $134. On launch pricing ($100 vs $134), Celeron 925 was $34 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Celeron 925 delivers 5.3 pts/$ vs 4.1 pts/$ for the Celeron SU2300 — making the Celeron 925 the 25.4% better value option.

Feature	Celeron 925	Celeron SU2300
MSRP	$100-25%	$134
Performance per Dollar	5.3+29%	4.1
Release Date	2011	2009

Search Celeron 925 on Amazon

Search Celeron SU2300 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.