Celeron D 352 vs VIA Nano U2250

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 D 352 vs VIA Nano U2250 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 D 352 vs VIA Nano U2250: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

Celeron D 352

2006

Why buy it

✅Includes a boxed cooler (true), unlike VIA Nano U2250.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than VIA Nano U2250 across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (418 vs 425).
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 6.1 vs 8.5 PassMark/$ ($69 MSRP vs $50 MSRP).
❌8300% higher power demand at 84W vs 1W.

VIA Nano U2250

2009

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +9.8% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Costs $19 less on MSRP ($50 MSRP vs $69 MSRP).
✅Delivers 40.3% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 8.5 vs 6.1 PassMark/$ ($50 MSRP vs $69 MSRP).
✅Draws 1W instead of 84W, a 83W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Celeron D 352.

Quick Answers

So, is VIA Nano U2250 better than Celeron D 352?

Yes. VIA Nano U2250 is the better all-around CPU here. It gives you a 9.8% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data, 1.7% 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, VIA Nano U2250 is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 9.8% 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, VIA Nano U2250 is the stronger fit. You are getting 1.7% better PassMark, backed by 1 cores and 1 threads.

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

VIA Nano U2250 is the better buy right now. VIA Nano U2250 comes in $19 cheaper on MSRP at $50 MSRP versus $69 MSRP, and it still gives you a 9.8% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. It is also 40.3% better value on MSRP (8.5 vs 6.1 PassMark/$), so you are getting the faster CPU without taking a value hit on paper.

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

VIA Nano U2250 makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2009 vs 2006) and more multi-core headroom with 1 cores / 1 threads instead of 1/1. That extra compute headroom is more likely to matter as games, background tasks, and creator workloads get heavier.

Celeron D 352 vs VIA Nano U2250 Technical Specifications

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

Celeron D 352

The Celeron D 352 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 2007-01-01. It is based on the Cedar Mill (2006) architecture. It features 1 cores and 1 threads. Base frequency is 3.2 GHz, with boost up to 3.2 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 512 kB. Built on 65 nm process technology. Socket: LGA775. Thermal design power (TDP): 86 Watt. Memory support: DDR1, DDR2, DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 418 points. Launch price was $69.

VIA Nano U2250

The VIA Nano U2250 is manufactured by VIA. It was released in 1 January 2009 (16 years ago). It is based on the Isaiah (2009) architecture. It features 1 cores and 1 threads. Max frequency: 1.5 GHz. L2 cache: 1 MB. Built on 65 nm process technology. Socket: NanoBGA2. Thermal design power (TDP): 1 MB. Passmark benchmark score: 425 points. Launch price was $69.

⚡

Processing Power

Both the Celeron D 352 and VIA Nano U2250 share an identical 1-core/1-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 3.2 GHz on the Celeron D 352 versus 1.5 GHz on the VIA Nano U2250 — a 72.3% clock advantage for the Celeron D 352. The Celeron D 352 uses the Cedar Mill (2006) architecture (65 nm), while the VIA Nano U2250 uses Isaiah (2009) (65 nm). In PassMark, the Celeron D 352 scores 418 against the VIA Nano U2250's 425 — a 1.7% lead for the VIA Nano U2250. Geekbench 6 single-core — the metric most relevant to gaming — records 180 vs 150, a 18.2% lead for the Celeron D 352 that directly translates to higher frame rates.

Feature	Celeron D 352	VIA Nano U2250
Cores / Threads	1 / 1	1 / 1
Boost Clock	3.2 GHz+113%	1.5 GHz
Base Clock	3.2 GHz	—
L3 Cache	0 kB	—
L2 Cache	512 kB	1 MB+100%
Process	65 nm	65 nm
Architecture	Cedar Mill (2006)	Isaiah (2009)
PassMark	418	425+2%
Geekbench 6 Single	180+20%	150
Geekbench 6 Multi	—	150

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Celeron D 352 uses the LGA775 socket (PCIe 1.1), while the VIA Nano U2250 uses NanoBGA2 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches 800 on the Celeron D 352 versus DDR3-1333 on the VIA Nano U2250 — the VIA Nano U2250 supports 66.6% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. Both support up to 4 GB of RAM. Memory channels: 2 (Celeron D 352) vs 1 (VIA Nano U2250). PCIe lanes: 0 (Celeron D 352) vs 1 (VIA Nano U2250) — the VIA Nano U2250 offers 1 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: 865G,915,945,965,G31,G41 (Celeron D 352) and VX900 (VIA Nano U2250).

Feature	Celeron D 352	VIA Nano U2250
Socket	LGA775	NanoBGA2
PCIe Generation	PCIe 1.1	PCIe 2.0+82%
Max RAM Speed	800	DDR3-1333+67%
Max RAM Capacity	4 GB	4 GB
RAM Channels	2+100%	1
ECC Support	No	No
PCIe Lanes	0	1

🔧

Advanced Features

Neither processor supports overclocking. Virtualization support: false (Celeron D 352) vs VT-x (VIA Nano U2250). Primary use case: Celeron D 352 targets Budget, VIA Nano U2250 targets Embedded. Direct competitor: Celeron D 352 rivals Pentium 4 2.80.

Feature	Celeron D 352	VIA Nano U2250
Integrated GPU	No	No
IGPU Model	—	None
Unlocked	No	No
AVX-512	No	No
Virtualization	false	VT-x
Target Use	Budget	Embedded

💰

Value Analysis

At launch, the Celeron D 352 was priced at $69, while the VIA Nano U2250 came in at $50. On launch pricing ($69 vs $50), VIA Nano U2250 was $19 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Celeron D 352 delivers 6.1 pts/$ vs 8.5 pts/$ for the VIA Nano U2250 — making the VIA Nano U2250 the 33.5% better value option.

Feature	Celeron D 352	VIA Nano U2250
MSRP	$69	$50-28%
Performance per Dollar	6.1	8.5+39%
Release Date	2006	2009

Search Celeron D 352 on Amazon

Search VIA Nano U2250 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.