Celeron B815 vs Phenom II X4 820
Celeron B815
Phenom II X4 820
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 B815 is positioned at rank 799 and the Phenom II X4 820 is on rank 916, so the Celeron B815 offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar Celeron B815
Performance Per Dollar Phenom II X4 820
Performance Comparison
About PassMark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
| Insight | Celeron B815 | Phenom II X4 820 |
|---|---|---|
| Gaming | ❌ Lower gaming performance | ✅ Superior gaming performance |
| Workstation | ❌ Weaker in multi-core tasks | ✅ Better multi-core power |
| Price | ✅ More affordable ($15) | ⚠️ Higher cost ($50) |
| Longevity | 🛑 Legacy (Sandy Bridge (2011−2013) / 32 nm) | 🛑 Legacy (Deneb (2009−2011) / 45 nm) |
💎 Value Proposition
| Insight | Celeron B815 | Phenom II X4 820 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ✅ Better overall value (+230%) | ❌ Lower cost efficiency |
| Upfront Cost | ✅ More affordable ($15) | ⚠️ Higher cost ($50) |
Performance Check
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 B815 and Phenom II X4 820
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.
Phenom II X4 820
The Phenom II X4 820 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 1 September 2009 (16 years ago). It is based on the Deneb (2009−2011) architecture. It features 4 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 2.8 GHz, with boost up to 2.8 GHz. L3 cache: 4 MB (total). L2 cache: 512 kB (per core). Built on 45 nm process technology. Socket: AM3. Thermal design power (TDP): 95 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 2,114 points. Launch price was $90.
Processing Power
The Celeron B815 packs 2 cores / 2 threads, while the Phenom II X4 820 offers 4 cores / 4 threads — the Phenom II X4 820 has 2 more cores. Boost clocks reach 1.6 GHz on the Celeron B815 versus 2.8 GHz on the Phenom II X4 820 — a 54.5% clock advantage for the Phenom II X4 820 (base: 1.6 GHz vs 2.8 GHz). The Celeron B815 uses the Sandy Bridge (2011−2013) architecture (32 nm), while the Phenom II X4 820 uses Deneb (2009−2011) (45 nm). In PassMark, the Celeron B815 scores 2,093 against the Phenom II X4 820's 2,114 — a 1% lead for the Phenom II X4 820. L3 cache: 2 MB (total) on the Celeron B815 vs 4 MB (total) on the Phenom II X4 820.
| Feature | Celeron B815 | Phenom II X4 820 |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 2 / 2 | 4 / 4+100% |
| Boost Clock | 1.6 GHz | 2.8 GHz+75% |
| Base Clock | 1.6 GHz | 2.8 GHz+75% |
| L3 Cache | 2 MB (total) | 4 MB (total)+100% |
| L2 Cache | 256K (per core) | 512 kB (per core)+100% |
| Process | 32 nm-29% | 45 nm |
| Architecture | Sandy Bridge (2011−2013) | Deneb (2009−2011) |
| PassMark | 2,093 | 2,114+1% |
Memory & Platform
The Celeron B815 uses the PGA988 socket (PCIe 2.0), while the Phenom II X4 820 uses AM3 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.
| Feature | Celeron B815 | Phenom II X4 820 |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | PGA988 | AM3 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 2.0 | PCIe 2.0 |
| Max RAM Speed | DDR3-1333 | — |
| Max RAM Capacity | 16 GB | — |
| RAM Channels | 2 | — |
| ECC Support | ❌ | — |
| PCIe Lanes | 16 | — |
Advanced Features
Virtualization: VT-x (Celeron B815) / not specified (Phenom II X4 820). The Celeron B815 includes integrated graphics (HD Graphics (Sandy Bridge)), while the Phenom II X4 820 requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Celeron B815 targets Budget. Direct competitor: Celeron B815 rivals Pentium 967.
| Feature | Celeron B815 | Phenom II X4 820 |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | Yes | — |
| IGPU Model | HD Graphics (Sandy Bridge) | — |
| Unlocked | No | — |
| AVX-512 | No | — |
| Virtualization | VT-x | — |
| Target Use | Budget | — |
Value Analysis
The Celeron B815 launched at $86 MSRP, while the Phenom II X4 820 debuted at $150. At current prices ($15 vs $50), the Celeron B815 is $35 cheaper. In terms of value (PassMark points per dollar), the Celeron B815 delivers 139.5 pts/$ vs 42.3 pts/$ for the Phenom II X4 820 — making the Celeron B815 the 107% better value option.
| Feature | Celeron B815 | Phenom II X4 820 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $86-43% | $150 |
| Avg Price (30d) | $15-70% | $50 |
| Performance per Dollar | 139.5+230% | 42.3 |
| Release Date | 2012 | 2009 |
Top Performing CPUs
The most powerful cpus ranked by PassMark CPU Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar CPU comparisons based on Celeron B815 and Phenom II X4 820
