Celeron Dual-Core SU2300 vs Core i3-330E

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 Dual-Core SU2300 vs Core i3-330E 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 Dual-Core SU2300 vs Core i3-330E: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

Celeron Dual-Core SU2300

2009

Why buy it

✅Costs $43 less on MSRP ($134 MSRP vs $177 MSRP).
✅Delivers 31.0% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 9.3 vs 7.1 PassMark/$ ($134 MSRP vs $177 MSRP).
✅Draws 1W instead of 35W, a 34W reduction.
✅100+% more PCIe lanes (6 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (1,250 vs 1,260).

Core i3-330E

2010

Why buy it

✅+0.8% higher PassMark.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 7.1 vs 9.3 PassMark/$ ($177 MSRP vs $134 MSRP).
❌3400% higher power demand at 35W vs 1W.

Quick Answers

So, is Celeron Dual-Core SU2300 better than Core i3-330E?

It depends on what you want from the system. For gaming, Celeron Dual-Core SU2300 is ahead with a 0.9% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. For rendering, compiling, streaming, and heavier multitasking, Core i3-330E pulls ahead with 0.8% better PassMark.

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Core i3-330E is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.8% better PassMark, backed by 2 cores and 4 threads.

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

Celeron Dual-Core SU2300 is the better buy right now. Celeron Dual-Core SU2300 comes in $43 cheaper on MSRP at $134 MSRP versus $177 MSRP, and it still gives you a 0.9% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. The compromise is that Core i3-330E is still stronger for heavier multi-core work with 0.8% better PassMark. It is also 31.0% better value on MSRP (9.3 vs 7.1 PassMark/$), so you are getting the faster CPU without taking a value hit on paper.

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

Core i3-330E makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2010 vs 2009) and more multi-core headroom with 2 cores / 4 threads instead of 2/2. That extra compute headroom is more likely to matter as games, background tasks, and creator workloads get heavier.

Celeron Dual-Core SU2300 vs Core i3-330E Technical Specifications

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

Celeron Dual-Core SU2300

The Celeron Dual-Core SU2300 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 1 September 2009 (16 years ago). It is based on the Penryn (2008−2011) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Max frequency: 1.2 GHz. L2 cache: 1 MB. Built on 45 nm process technology. Socket: BGA956. Thermal design power (TDP): 1 MB. Passmark benchmark score: 1,250 points. Launch price was $134.

Core i3-330E

The Core i3-330E is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 7 January 2010 (15 years ago). It is based on the Westmere (2010−2011) architecture. It features 2 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 2.13 GHz, with boost up to 0.03 GHz. L3 cache: 3 MB. L2 cache: 512 kB. Built on 32 nm process technology. Socket: BGA1288. Thermal design power (TDP): 35 Watt. Memory support: DDR3-800, DDR3-1066. Passmark benchmark score: 1,260 points. Launch price was $177.

⚡

Processing Power

The Celeron Dual-Core SU2300 packs 2 cores / 2 threads, matching the Core i3-330E's 2 cores. Boost clocks reach 1.2 GHz on the Celeron Dual-Core SU2300 versus 0.03 GHz on the Core i3-330E — a 190.2% clock advantage for the Celeron Dual-Core SU2300. The Celeron Dual-Core SU2300 uses the Penryn (2008−2011) architecture (45 nm), while the Core i3-330E uses Westmere (2010−2011) (32 nm). In PassMark, the Celeron Dual-Core SU2300 scores 1,250 against the Core i3-330E's 1,260 — a 0.8% lead for the Core i3-330E.

Feature	Celeron Dual-Core SU2300	Core i3-330E
Cores / Threads	2 / 2	2 / 4
Boost Clock	1.2 GHz+3900%	0.03 GHz
Base Clock	—	2.13 GHz
L3 Cache	—	3 MB
L2 Cache	1 MB+100%	512 kB
Process	45 nm	32 nm-29%
Architecture	Penryn (2008−2011)	Westmere (2010−2011)
PassMark	1,250	1,260
Geekbench 6 Single	150	—
Geekbench 6 Multi	280	—

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Celeron Dual-Core SU2300 uses the BGA956 socket (PCIe 1.1), while the Core i3-330E uses BGA1288 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.

Feature	Celeron Dual-Core SU2300	Core i3-330E
Socket	BGA956	BGA1288
PCIe Generation	PCIe 1.1	PCIe 2.0+82%
Max RAM Speed	DDR3-800	—
Max RAM Capacity	4 GB	—
RAM Channels	2	—
ECC Support	No	—
PCIe Lanes	6	—

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization: VT-x (Celeron Dual-Core SU2300) / not specified (Core i3-330E). Primary use case: Celeron Dual-Core SU2300 targets Legacy Mobile. Direct competitor: Celeron Dual-Core SU2300 rivals Pentium SU4100.

Feature	Celeron Dual-Core SU2300	Core i3-330E
Integrated GPU	No	—
IGPU Model	None	—
Unlocked	No	—
AVX-512	No	—
Virtualization	VT-x	—
Target Use	Legacy Mobile	—

💰

Value Analysis

At launch, the Celeron Dual-Core SU2300 was priced at $134, while the Core i3-330E came in at $177. On launch pricing ($134 vs $177), Celeron Dual-Core SU2300 was $43 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Celeron Dual-Core SU2300 delivers 9.3 pts/$ vs 7.1 pts/$ for the Core i3-330E — making the Celeron Dual-Core SU2300 the 26.9% better value option.

Feature	Celeron Dual-Core SU2300	Core i3-330E
MSRP	$134-24%	$177
Performance per Dollar	9.3+31%	7.1
Release Date	2009	2010

Search Celeron Dual-Core SU2300 on Amazon

Search Core i3-330E 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.