Celeron B810
VS
A6-3650

Celeron B810 vs A6-3650

Intel

Celeron B810

2 Cores2 Thrd0 WWMax: 1.6 GHz2011
VS
AMD

A6-3650

4 Cores4 Thrd100 WWMax: 2.6 GHz2011

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 B810 is positioned at rank 801 and the A6-3650 is on rank 832, so the Celeron B810 offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.

MSRP is the manufacturer's suggested retail price.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.

Performance Per Dollar Celeron B810

#789
Atom x5-Z8300
MSRP: $20|Avg: N/A
1207%
#790
Atom Z3735G
MSRP: $17|Avg: N/A
1189%
#791
Core i5-480M
MSRP: $81|Avg: $77
1092%
#792
Core i5-460M
MSRP: $80|Avg: $129
1087%
#793
Core i5-2540M
MSRP: $266|Avg: $10
1077%
#795
Core i5-450M
MSRP: $32|Avg: $31
1040%
#796
Core i3-380M
MSRP: $49|Avg: $25
997%
#797
Core i5-430M
MSRP: N/A|Avg: $33
995%
#798
Core 2 Duo T6600
MSRP: N/A|Avg: $4
969%
#801
Celeron B810
MSRP: $86|Avg: $86
100%
#803
Core i7-1365UE
MSRP: $429|Avg: $429
100%
#805
3020e
MSRP: $100|Avg: $25
99%
#809
Athlon II M320
MSRP: $75|Avg: $15
98%
#810
Celeron B800
MSRP: $80|Avg: $5
98%
#811
Celeron B710
MSRP: $86|Avg: $10
98%
#812
Athlon II Neo K345
MSRP: $50|Avg: $10
98%
Based on actual market prices and performance synthetic scores.

Performance Per Dollar A6-3650

#1
Ryzen 9 7950X
MSRP: $194|Avg: $20
17090%
#2
Core i9-10900T
MSRP: $120|Avg: $5
16148%
#3
Ryzen 3 PRO 4355GE
MSRP: $423|Avg: $5
11725%
#4
Ryzen Threadripper 3960X
MSRP: $1399|Avg: $85
3532%
#5
Ryzen 9 9950X
MSRP: $649|Avg: $129
2798%
#6
Ryzen 5 8400F
MSRP: $303|Avg: $55
2448%
#7
Ryzen 7 PRO 2700
MSRP: $299|Avg: $60
1402%
#8
Ryzen 5 2600X
MSRP: $229|Avg: $55
1384%
#9
Ryzen 3 PRO 5350G
MSRP: $150|Avg: $60
1260%
#10
Core Ultra 5 245KF
MSRP: $294|Avg: $189
1260%
#11
Ryzen 5 5500
MSRP: $159|Avg: $85
1246%
#12
Ryzen 5 3600
MSRP: $199|Avg: $80
1212%
#13
Core i3-9100E
MSRP: $202|Avg: $30
1195%
#14
Core Ultra 5 245K
MSRP: $319|Avg: $200
1190%
#15
Core i3-8300T
MSRP: $138|Avg: $25
1179%
#295
Core i9-7940X
MSRP: $1399|Avg: $275
100%
#832
A6-3650
MSRP: $115|Avg: $20
100%
#833
Core i7-4770R
MSRP: $360|Avg: $89
100%
#835
Core i7-2600
MSRP: $294|Avg: $50
100%
#836
Pentium G870
MSRP: $86|Avg: $15
100%
#837
Athlon II X2 210e
MSRP: $60|Avg: $28
100%
#838
Pentium G645
MSRP: $80|Avg: $15
99%
#840
Pentium G630
MSRP: $75|Avg: $46
99%
#841
Core i5-2550K
MSRP: $235|Avg: $46
99%
#842
Athlon II X4 600e
MSRP: $100|Avg: $20
98%
#843
Core i7-4785T
MSRP: $306|Avg: $32
98%
#844
Core i5-6442EQ
MSRP: $250|Avg: $250
98%
#845
Core i5-4690S
MSRP: $306|Avg: $189
98%
#846
Core i3-3250
MSRP: $138|Avg: $40
98%
#847
Core i3-3240
MSRP: $132|Avg: $15
98%
Based on actual market prices and performance synthetic scores.

Performance Comparison

About PassMark

🏆 Chipversus Verdict

🚀 Performance Leadership

Performance Leadership: The A6-3650 delivers superior performance across the board. It outperforms the Celeron B810 in both compute-intensive tasks (0.3% faster) and gaming workloads.
InsightCeleron B810A6-3650
Gaming
Lower gaming performance
Superior gaming performance
Workstation
Weaker in multi-core tasks
Better multi-core power
Price
⚠️ Higher cost ($86)
More affordable ($20)
Longevity
🛑 Legacy (Sandy Bridge (2011−2013) / 32 nm)
🛑 Legacy (Llano (2011−2012) / 32 nm)

💎 Value Proposition

Efficiency: Even within a comparison of older hardware, the A6-3650 stands out as the superior choice. It is effectively 77% cheaper ($20 vs $86) while identifying as the stronger performer.
InsightCeleron B810A6-3650
Cost Efficiency
Lower cost efficiency
Better overall value (+331%)
Upfront Cost
⚠️ Higher cost ($86)
More affordable ($20)

Performance Check

Paired with RTX 4090

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 B810 and A6-3650

Intel

Celeron B810

The Celeron B810 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 1 March 2011 (14 years ago). It is based on the Sandy Bridge (2011−2013) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 1.6 GHz, with boost up to 1.6 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: 2,091 points. Launch price was $86.

AMD

A6-3650

The A6-3650 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 2014-01-01. It is based on the Llano (2011−2012) architecture. It features 4 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 2.6 GHz, with boost up to 2.6 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 1 MB (per core). Built on 32 nm process technology. Socket: FM1. Thermal design power (TDP): 100 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 2,098 points. Launch price was $70.

Processing Power

The Celeron B810 packs 2 cores / 2 threads, while the A6-3650 offers 4 cores / 4 threads — the A6-3650 has 2 more cores. Boost clocks reach 1.6 GHz on the Celeron B810 versus 2.6 GHz on the A6-3650 — a 47.6% clock advantage for the A6-3650 (base: 1.6 GHz vs 2.6 GHz). The Celeron B810 uses the Sandy Bridge (2011−2013) architecture (32 nm), while the A6-3650 uses Llano (2011−2012) (32 nm). In PassMark, the Celeron B810 scores 2,091 against the A6-3650's 2,098 — a 0.3% lead for the A6-3650. L3 cache: 2 MB (total) on the Celeron B810 vs 0 kB on the A6-3650.

FeatureCeleron B810A6-3650
Cores / Threads
2 / 2
4 / 4+100%
Boost Clock
1.6 GHz
2.6 GHz+63%
Base Clock
1.6 GHz
2.6 GHz+63%
L3 Cache
2 MB (total)
0 kB
L2 Cache
256K (per core)
1 MB (per core)+300%
Process
32 nm
32 nm
Architecture
Sandy Bridge (2011−2013)
Llano (2011−2012)
PassMark
2,091
2,098
Geekbench 6 Single
311
🧠

Memory & Platform

The Celeron B810 uses the PGA988 socket (PCIe 2.0), while the A6-3650 uses FM1 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Both support up to DDR3-1333 memory speed. Both support up to 16 GB of RAM. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. Both provide 16 PCIe lanes. Chipset compatibility: HM65,HM67,QM67,QM77 (Celeron B810) and A55,A75 (A6-3650).

FeatureCeleron B810A6-3650
Socket
PGA988
FM1
PCIe Generation
PCIe 2.0
PCIe 2.0
Max RAM Speed
DDR3-1333
DDR3-1866
Max RAM Capacity
16 GB
16 GB
RAM Channels
2
2
ECC Support
PCIe Lanes
16
16
🔧

Advanced Features

Neither processor supports overclocking. Virtualization support: VT-x (Celeron B810) vs AMD-V (A6-3650). Both include integrated graphics HD Graphics (Sandy Bridge) (Celeron B810) and Radeon HD 6530D (A6-3650) — useful as a fallback for troubleshooting or display output without a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Celeron B810 targets Budget, A6-3650 targets Budget Desktop. Direct competitor: Celeron B810 rivals Pentium 967; A6-3650 rivals Pentium G850.

FeatureCeleron B810A6-3650
Integrated GPU
Yes
Yes
IGPU Model
HD Graphics (Sandy Bridge)
Radeon HD 6530D
Unlocked
No
No
AVX-512
No
No
Virtualization
VT-x
AMD-V
Target Use
Budget
Budget Desktop
💰

Value Analysis

The Celeron B810 launched at $86 MSRP, while the A6-3650 debuted at $115. At current prices ($86 vs $20), the A6-3650 is $66 cheaper. In terms of value (PassMark points per dollar), the Celeron B810 delivers 24.3 pts/$ vs 104.9 pts/$ for the A6-3650 — making the A6-3650 the 124.7% better value option.

FeatureCeleron B810A6-3650
MSRP
$86-25%
$115
Avg Price (30d)
$86
$20-77%
Performance per Dollar
24.3
104.9+332%
Release Date
2011
2011