Celeron B720 vs Opteron 254

Celeron B720 vs Opteron 254 Performance Spectrum

Celeron B720

1 / 1

665

0.0%

690

+3.8%

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 B720 vs Opteron 254 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 B720 vs Opteron 254: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

Celeron B720

2012

Why buy it

✅100+% more PCIe lanes (16 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with HD Graphics (Sandy Bridge), while Opteron 254 needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (665 vs 690).
❌Launch MSRP is still $70 MSRP, while Opteron 254 mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.

Opteron 254

2005

Why buy it

Trade-offs

❌No integrated graphics, while Celeron B720 can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Quick Answers

So, is Opteron 254 better than Celeron B720?

Not really, because they are built for different jobs. Opteron 254 makes more sense for workstation-style multi-core throughput, while Celeron B720 is the more practical desktop choice for gaming, platform cost, and everyday use.

Which one is better for gaming?

If gaming is the priority, Opteron 254 is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 1.4% 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, Opteron 254 is the stronger fit. You are getting 3.8% better PassMark, backed by 1 cores and 1 threads.

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

Opteron 254 is still the much better call for a fresh build. Opteron 254 comes in at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus $70 MSRP, and it still gives you a 1.4% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. Celeron B720 only looks stronger on raw value math because it is extremely cheap, but that usually means used-market pricing on an obsolete 2012 platform. Even with 100.0% better value on paper (9.5 vs 0.0 PassMark/$), it really only makes sense as a cheap stopgap or a niche existing-platform option for someone already on G2.

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

Celeron B720 makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2012 vs 2005). That makes it the safer long-term bet.

Celeron B720 vs Opteron 254 Technical Specifications

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

Celeron B720

The Celeron B720 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 1 January 2012 (13 years ago). It is based on the Sandy Bridge (2011−2013) architecture. It features 1 cores and 1 threads. Base frequency is 1.7 GHz, with boost up to 1.7 GHz. L3 cache: 1.5 MB (total). L2 cache: 256 kB (per core). Built on 32 nm process technology. Socket: G2. Thermal design power (TDP): 35 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 665 points. Launch price was $70.

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

Both the Celeron B720 and Opteron 254 share an identical 1-core/1-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 1.7 GHz on the Celeron B720 versus 2.8 GHz on the Opteron 254 — a 48.9% clock advantage for the Opteron 254. The Celeron B720 uses the Sandy Bridge (2011−2013) architecture (32 nm), while the Opteron 254 uses Troy (2005) (90 nm). In PassMark, the Celeron B720 scores 665 against the Opteron 254's 690 — a 3.7% lead for the Opteron 254. L3 cache: 1.5 MB (total) on the Celeron B720 vs 0 kB on the Opteron 254.

Feature	Celeron B720	Opteron 254
Cores / Threads	1 / 1	1 / 1
Boost Clock	1.7 GHz	2.8 GHz+65%
Base Clock	1.7 GHz	—
L3 Cache	1.5 MB (total)	0 kB
L2 Cache	256 kB (per core)	1 MB+300%
Process	32 nm-64%	90 nm
Architecture	Sandy Bridge (2011−2013)	Troy (2005)
PassMark	665	690+4%

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Celeron B720 uses the G2 socket (PCIe 2.0), while the Opteron 254 uses 940 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.

Feature	Celeron B720	Opteron 254
Socket	G2	940
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 B720) / not specified (Opteron 254). The Celeron B720 includes integrated graphics (HD Graphics (Sandy Bridge)), while the Opteron 254 requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Celeron B720 targets Budget. Direct competitor: Celeron B720 rivals Pentium 967.