Celeron B810 vs Celeron B815

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 B810 vs Celeron B815 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 B810 vs Celeron B815: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

Celeron B810

2011

Why buy it

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (2,091 vs 2,093).

Celeron B815

2012

Why buy it

✅+0.1% higher PassMark.

Trade-offs

❌Fewer obvious downsides in this matchup outside of normal market pricing swings.

Quick Answers

So, is Celeron B815 better than Celeron B810?

Yes. Celeron B815 is the better all-around CPU here. It gives you 0.1% better PassMark and the stronger long-term platform, which is enough to make it the stronger overall pick.

Which one is better for gaming?

For gaming, this matchup is basically a tie in the data we have.

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Celeron B815 is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.1% better PassMark, backed by 2 cores and 2 threads.

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

Celeron B815 is the better buy right now. Celeron B815 comes in in basically the same MSRP band at $86 MSRP versus $86 MSRP, and it still gives you 0.1% higher PassMark. It is also 0.1% better value on MSRP (24.3 vs 24.3 PassMark/$), so you are getting the faster CPU without taking a value hit on paper.

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

Celeron B815 makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2012 vs 2011) and more multi-core headroom with 2 cores / 2 threads instead of 2/2. That extra compute headroom is more likely to matter as games, background tasks, and creator workloads get heavier.

Celeron B810 vs Celeron B815 Technical Specifications

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

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.

Celeron B815

The Celeron B815 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 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: 2,093 points. Launch price was $86.

⚡

Processing Power

Both the Celeron B810 and Celeron B815 share an identical 2-core/2-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 1.6 GHz on the Celeron B810 versus 1.6 GHz on the Celeron B815 — identical boost frequencies (base: 1.6 GHz vs 1.6 GHz). Both are built on the Sandy Bridge (2011−2013) architecture using a 32 nm process. In PassMark, the Celeron B810 scores 2,091 against the Celeron B815's 2,093 — a 0.1% lead for the Celeron B815. Both processors carry 2 MB (total) of L3 cache.

Feature	Celeron B810	Celeron B815
Cores / Threads	2 / 2	2 / 2
Boost Clock	1.6 GHz	1.6 GHz
Base Clock	1.6 GHz	1.6 GHz
L3 Cache	2 MB (total)	2 MB (total)
L2 Cache	256K (per core)	256K (per core)
Process	32 nm	32 nm
Architecture	Sandy Bridge (2011−2013)	Sandy Bridge (2011−2013)
PassMark	2,091	2,093

🧠

Memory & Platform

Both processors use the PGA988 socket with PCIe 2.0. 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 HM65,HM67,QM67,QM77 (Celeron B815).

Feature	Celeron B810	Celeron B815
Socket	PGA988	PGA988
PCIe Generation	PCIe 2.0	PCIe 2.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR3-1333	DDR3-1333
Max RAM Capacity	16 GB	16 GB
RAM Channels	2	2
ECC Support	No	No
PCIe Lanes	16	16

🔧

Advanced Features

Neither processor supports overclocking. Both support VT-x virtualization. Both include integrated graphics — HD Graphics (Sandy Bridge) (Celeron B810) and HD Graphics (Sandy Bridge) (Celeron B815) — useful as a fallback for troubleshooting or display output without a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Celeron B810 targets Budget, Celeron B815 targets Budget. Direct competitor: Celeron B810 rivals Pentium 967; Celeron B815 rivals Pentium 967.

Feature	Celeron B810	Celeron B815
Integrated GPU	Yes	Yes
IGPU Model	HD Graphics (Sandy Bridge)	HD Graphics (Sandy Bridge)
Unlocked	No	No
AVX-512	No	No
Virtualization	VT-x	VT-x
Target Use	Budget	Budget

💰

Value Analysis

At launch, the Celeron B810 was priced at $86, while the Celeron B815 came in at $86. On launch pricing ($86 vs $86), Celeron B815 was $0 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Celeron B810 delivers 24.3 pts/$ vs 24.3 pts/$ for the Celeron B815 — making the Celeron B815 the 0.1% better value option.

Feature	Celeron B810	Celeron B815
MSRP	$86	$86
Performance per Dollar	24.3	24.3
Release Date	2011	2012

Search Celeron B810 on Amazon

Search Celeron B815 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.