Celeron B800 vs Core i3-4158U

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 B800 vs Core i3-4158U 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 B800 vs Core i3-4158U: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

Celeron B800

2011

Why buy it

✅Draws 35W instead of 512W, a 477W reduction.
✅33.3% more PCIe lanes (16 vs 12) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (1,910 vs 1,921).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (2 MB vs 3 MB).
❌Launch MSRP is still $80 MSRP, while Core i3-4158U mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.

Core i3-4158U

2013

Why buy it

✅+50% larger total L3 cache (3 MB vs 2 MB).

Trade-offs

❌1362.9% higher power demand at 512W vs 35W.

Quick Answers

So, is Core i3-4158U better than Celeron B800?

Yes. Core i3-4158U is the better all-around CPU here. It gives you a 0.6% average FPS lead across 31 shared CPU game tests in our data, 0.6% better PassMark, and the stronger long-term platform, which is enough to make it the stronger overall pick.

Which one is better for gaming?

If gaming is the priority, Core i3-4158U is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 0.6% more average FPS across 31 shared CPU game tests.

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Core i3-4158U is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.6% better PassMark, backed by 2 cores and 4 threads. It also has the larger cache pool with 50% larger total L3 cache (3 MB vs 2 MB).

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

Core i3-4158U is still the much better call for a fresh build. Core i3-4158U comes in at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus $80 MSRP, and it still gives you a 0.6% average FPS lead across 31 shared CPU game tests in our data. Celeron B800 only looks stronger on raw value math because it is extremely cheap, but that usually means used-market pricing on an obsolete 2011 platform. Even with 100.0% better value on paper (23.9 vs 0.0 PassMark/$), it really only makes sense as a cheap stopgap or a niche existing-platform option for someone already on PGA988.

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

Core i3-4158U makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2013 vs 2011), 50% larger total L3 cache (3 MB vs 2 MB), and more multi-core headroom with 2 cores / 4 threads instead of 2/2. That extra compute headroom is more likely to matter as games, background tasks, and creator workloads get heavier.

Celeron B800 vs Core i3-4158U Technical Specifications

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

Celeron B800

The Celeron B800 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 1.5 GHz, with boost up to 1.5 GHz. L3 cache: 2 MB (total). L2 cache: 256K (per core). Built on 32 nm process technology. Socket: PGA988. Thermal design power (TDP): 35 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 1,910 points. Launch price was $80.

Core i3-4158U

The Core i3-4158U is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 4 June 2013 (12 years ago). It is based on the Haswell (2013−2015) architecture. It features 2 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 2 GHz, with boost up to 2 GHz. L3 cache: 3 MB (total). L2 cache: 256K (per core). Built on 22 nm process technology. Socket: FCBGA1168. Thermal design power (TDP): 28 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 1,921 points. Launch price was $315.

⚡

Processing Power

The Celeron B800 packs 2 cores / 2 threads, matching the Core i3-4158U's 2 cores. Boost clocks reach 1.5 GHz on the Celeron B800 versus 2 GHz on the Core i3-4158U — a 28.6% clock advantage for the Core i3-4158U (base: 1.5 GHz vs 2 GHz). The Celeron B800 uses the Sandy Bridge (2011−2013) architecture (32 nm), while the Core i3-4158U uses Haswell (2013−2015) (22 nm). In PassMark, the Celeron B800 scores 1,910 against the Core i3-4158U's 1,921 — a 0.6% lead for the Core i3-4158U. L3 cache: 2 MB (total) on the Celeron B800 vs 3 MB (total) on the Core i3-4158U.

Feature	Celeron B800	Core i3-4158U
Cores / Threads	2 / 2	2 / 4
Boost Clock	1.5 GHz	2 GHz+33%
Base Clock	1.5 GHz	2 GHz+33%
L3 Cache	2 MB (total)	3 MB (total)+50%
L2 Cache	256K (per core)	256K (per core)
Process	32 nm	22 nm-31%
Architecture	Sandy Bridge (2011−2013)	Haswell (2013−2015)
PassMark	1,910	1,921
Geekbench 6 Single	—	457

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Celeron B800 uses the PGA988 socket (PCIe 2.0), while the Core i3-4158U uses FCBGA1168 (PCIe 3.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR3-1333 on the Celeron B800 versus DDR3L-1600 on the Core i3-4158U — the Core i3-4158U supports 20% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. Both support up to 16 GB of RAM. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. PCIe lanes: 16 (Celeron B800) vs 12 (Core i3-4158U) — the Celeron B800 offers 4 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: HM65,HM67,QM67,QM77 (Celeron B800) and HM86,HM87 (Core i3-4158U).

Feature	Celeron B800	Core i3-4158U
Socket	PGA988	FCBGA1168
PCIe Generation	PCIe 2.0	PCIe 3.0+50%
Max RAM Speed	DDR3-1333	DDR3L-1600+20%
Max RAM Capacity	16 GB	16 GB
RAM Channels	2	2
ECC Support	No	No
PCIe Lanes	16+33%	12

🔧

Advanced Features

Neither processor supports overclocking. Virtualization support: VT-x (Celeron B800) vs VT-x / VT-d / EPT (Core i3-4158U). Both include integrated graphics — HD Graphics (Sandy Bridge) (Celeron B800) and Intel Iris Graphics 5100 (Core i3-4158U) — useful as a fallback for troubleshooting or display output without a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Celeron B800 targets Budget, Core i3-4158U targets Multimedia. Direct competitor: Celeron B800 rivals Pentium 967.

Feature	Celeron B800	Core i3-4158U
Integrated GPU	Yes	Yes
IGPU Model	HD Graphics (Sandy Bridge)	Intel Iris Graphics 5100
Unlocked	No	No
AVX-512	No	No
Virtualization	VT-x	VT-x / VT-d / EPT
Target Use	Budget	Multimedia