Celeron B800 vs Opteron X2170

Celeron B800 vs Opteron X2170 Performance Spectrum

Celeron B800

2 / 2

1,910

0.0%

1,911

+0.1%

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 B800 vs Opteron X2170 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 Opteron X2170: 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

✅100+% more PCIe lanes (16 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with HD Graphics (Sandy Bridge), while Opteron X2170 needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (1,910 vs 1,911).
❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than Opteron X2170, which brings 4 cores / 4 threads.
❌Launch MSRP is still $80 MSRP, while Opteron X2170 mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
❌40% higher power demand at 35W vs 25W.

Opteron X2170

2016

Why buy it

✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 4 cores / 4 threads.
✅Draws 25W instead of 35W, a 10W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌No integrated graphics, while Celeron B800 can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Quick Answers

So, is Opteron X2170 better than Celeron B800?

Not really, because they are built for different jobs. Opteron X2170 makes more sense for workstation-style multi-core throughput, while Celeron B800 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 X2170 is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 1.9% 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 X2170 is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.1% better PassMark, backed by 4 cores and 4 threads.

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

Opteron X2170 is still the much better call for a fresh build. Opteron X2170 comes in at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus $80 MSRP, and it still gives you a 1.9% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. Celeron B800 only looks stronger on raw value math because it is extremely cheap, but that usually means used-market pricing on an obsolete 2011 platform. Even with 100.0% better value on paper (23.9 vs 0.0 PassMark/$), 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?

Opteron X2170 makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2016 vs 2011) and more multi-core headroom with 4 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 Opteron X2170 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.

Opteron X2170

The Opteron X2170 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 2015-01-01. It is based on the Steppe Eagle (2016) architecture. It features 4 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 2.4 GHz, with boost up to 2.4 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 2 MB (total). Built on 28 nm process technology. Socket: FT3. Thermal design power (TDP): 25 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 1,911 points. Launch price was $800.

⚡

Processing Power

The Celeron B800 packs 2 cores / 2 threads, while the Opteron X2170 offers 4 cores / 4 threads — the Opteron X2170 has 2 more cores. Boost clocks reach 1.5 GHz on the Celeron B800 versus 2.4 GHz on the Opteron X2170 — a 46.2% clock advantage for the Opteron X2170 (base: 1.5 GHz vs 2.4 GHz). The Celeron B800 uses the Sandy Bridge (2011−2013) architecture (32 nm), while the Opteron X2170 uses Steppe Eagle (2016) (28 nm). In PassMark, the Celeron B800 scores 1,910 against the Opteron X2170's 1,911 — a 0.1% lead for the Opteron X2170. L3 cache: 2 MB (total) on the Celeron B800 vs 0 kB on the Opteron X2170.

Feature	Celeron B800	Opteron X2170
Cores / Threads	2 / 2	4 / 4+100%
Boost Clock	1.5 GHz	2.4 GHz+60%
Base Clock	1.5 GHz	2.4 GHz+60%
L3 Cache	2 MB (total)	0 kB
L2 Cache	256K (per core)+12700%	2 MB (total)
Process	32 nm	28 nm-13%
Architecture	Sandy Bridge (2011−2013)	Steppe Eagle (2016)
PassMark	1,910	1,911

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Celeron B800 uses the PGA988 socket (PCIe 2.0), while the Opteron X2170 uses FT3 (PCIe 3.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.

Feature	Celeron B800	Opteron X2170
Socket	PGA988	FT3
PCIe Generation	PCIe 2.0	PCIe 3.0+50%
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 B800) / not specified (Opteron X2170). The Celeron B800 includes integrated graphics (HD Graphics (Sandy Bridge)), while the Opteron X2170 requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Celeron B800 targets Budget. Direct competitor: Celeron B800 rivals Pentium 967.