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 N2807 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 N2807: 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

✅Costs $21 less on MSRP ($86 MSRP vs $107 MSRP).
✅Delivers 24.3% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 24.3 vs 19.6 PassMark/$ ($86 MSRP vs $107 MSRP).
✅300% more PCIe lanes (16 vs 4) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Celeron N2807 across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (2,091 vs 2,093).

Celeron N2807

2014

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +3.3% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 19.6 vs 24.3 PassMark/$ ($107 MSRP vs $86 MSRP).

Quick Answers

So, is Celeron N2807 better than Celeron B810?

Yes. Celeron N2807 is the better all-around CPU here. It gives you a 3.3% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data, 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?

If gaming is the priority, Celeron N2807 is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 3.3% 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, Celeron N2807 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 N2807 is still the much better call for a fresh build. Celeron N2807 comes in 24.4% more expensive on MSRP at $107 MSRP versus $86 MSRP, and it still gives you a 3.3% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. Celeron B810 only looks stronger on raw value math because it is extremely cheap, but that usually means used-market pricing on an obsolete 2011 platform. Even with 24.3% better value on paper (24.3 vs 19.6 PassMark/$), 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?

Celeron N2807 makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2014 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 N2807 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 N2807

The Celeron N2807 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 23 February 2014 (11 years ago). It is based on the Bay Trail-M (2013−2014) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 1.58 GHz, with boost up to 2.16 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 512K (per core). Built on 22 nm process technology. Socket: FCBGA1170. Thermal design power (TDP): 4.3 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 2,093 points. Launch price was $107.

⚡

Processing Power

Both the Celeron B810 and Celeron N2807 share an identical 2-core/2-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 1.6 GHz on the Celeron B810 versus 2.16 GHz on the Celeron N2807 — a 29.8% clock advantage for the Celeron N2807 (base: 1.6 GHz vs 1.58 GHz). The Celeron B810 uses the Sandy Bridge (2011−2013) architecture (32 nm), while the Celeron N2807 uses Bay Trail-M (2013−2014) (22 nm). In PassMark, the Celeron B810 scores 2,091 against the Celeron N2807's 2,093 — a 0.1% lead for the Celeron N2807. L3 cache: 2 MB (total) on the Celeron B810 vs 0 kB on the Celeron N2807.

Feature	Celeron B810	Celeron N2807
Cores / Threads	2 / 2	2 / 2
Boost Clock	1.6 GHz	2.16 GHz+35%
Base Clock	1.6 GHz+1%	1.58 GHz
L3 Cache	2 MB (total)	0 kB
L2 Cache	256K (per core)	512K (per core)+100%
Process	32 nm	22 nm-31%
Architecture	Sandy Bridge (2011−2013)	Bay Trail-M (2013−2014)
PassMark	2,091	2,093
Geekbench 6 Single	—	180
Geekbench 6 Multi	—	320

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Celeron B810 uses the PGA988 socket (PCIe 2.0), while the Celeron N2807 uses FCBGA1170 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Both support up to DDR3-1333 memory speed. The Celeron B810 supports up to 16 GB of RAM compared to 4 GB — 300% more capacity for professional workloads. Memory channels: 2 (Celeron B810) vs 1 (Celeron N2807). PCIe lanes: 16 (Celeron B810) vs 4 (Celeron N2807) — the Celeron B810 offers 12 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: HM65,HM67,QM67,QM77 (Celeron B810) and SoC (Celeron N2807).

Feature	Celeron B810	Celeron N2807
Socket	PGA988	FCBGA1170
PCIe Generation	PCIe 2.0	PCIe 2.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR3-1333	DDR3L-1333
Max RAM Capacity	16 GB+300%	4 GB
RAM Channels	2+100%	1
ECC Support	No	No
PCIe Lanes	16+300%	4

🔧

Advanced Features

Neither processor supports overclocking. Both support VT-x virtualization. Both include integrated graphics — HD Graphics (Sandy Bridge) (Celeron B810) and Intel HD Graphics (Bay Trail) (Celeron N2807) — useful as a fallback for troubleshooting or display output without a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Celeron B810 targets Budget, Celeron N2807 targets Netbook. Direct competitor: Celeron B810 rivals Pentium 967; Celeron N2807 rivals AMD E1-6010.

Feature	Celeron B810	Celeron N2807
Integrated GPU	Yes	Yes
IGPU Model	HD Graphics (Sandy Bridge)	Intel HD Graphics (Bay Trail)
Unlocked	No	No
AVX-512	No	No
Virtualization	VT-x	VT-x
Target Use	Budget	Netbook

💰

Value Analysis

At launch, the Celeron B810 was priced at $86, while the Celeron N2807 came in at $107. On launch pricing ($86 vs $107), Celeron B810 was $21 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Celeron B810 delivers 24.3 pts/$ vs 19.6 pts/$ for the Celeron N2807 — making the Celeron B810 the 21.7% better value option.

Feature	Celeron B810	Celeron N2807
MSRP	$86-20%	$107
Performance per Dollar	24.3+24%	19.6
Release Date	2011	2014

Search Celeron B810 on Amazon

Search Celeron N2807 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.