Celeron Dual-Core T1700 vs Celeron N2815

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 T1700 vs Celeron N2815 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 T1700 vs Celeron N2815: 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 T1700

2008

Why buy it

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (1,058 vs 1,068).
❌No integrated graphics, while Celeron N2815 can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Celeron N2815

2013

Why buy it

✅100+% more PCIe lanes (4 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with Intel HD Graphics (Bay Trail), while Celeron Dual-Core T1700 needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

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

Quick Answers

So, is Celeron N2815 better than Celeron Dual-Core T1700?

Yes. Celeron N2815 is the better all-around CPU here. It gives you a 1.9% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data, 0.9% 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 N2815 is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 1.9% 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 N2815 is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.9% better PassMark, backed by 2 cores and 2 threads.

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

Celeron N2815 still makes the most sense overall. Celeron N2815 comes in at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it still gives you a 1.9% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data.

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

Celeron N2815 makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2013 vs 2008) 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 Dual-Core T1700 vs Celeron N2815 Technical Specifications

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

Celeron Dual-Core T1700

The Celeron Dual-Core T1700 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 2007-01-01. It is based on the Merom (2006−2008) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Max frequency: 1.83 GHz. L2 cache: 1 MB. Built on 65 nm process technology. Socket: PGA478. Thermal design power (TDP): 1 MB. Passmark benchmark score: 1,058 points. Launch price was $69.

Celeron N2815

The Celeron N2815 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 1 December 2013 (12 years ago). It is based on the Bay Trail-M (2013−2014) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 1.86 GHz, with boost up to 2.13 GHz. L3 cache: 1 MB. L2 cache: 1 MB. Built on 22 nm process technology. Socket: FCBGA1170. Thermal design power (TDP): 7.5 Watt. Memory support: DDR3L-1066. Passmark benchmark score: 1,068 points. Launch price was $107.

⚡

Processing Power

Both the Celeron Dual-Core T1700 and Celeron N2815 share an identical 2-core/2-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 1.83 GHz on the Celeron Dual-Core T1700 versus 2.13 GHz on the Celeron N2815 — a 15.2% clock advantage for the Celeron N2815. The Celeron Dual-Core T1700 uses the Merom (2006−2008) architecture (65 nm), while the Celeron N2815 uses Bay Trail-M (2013−2014) (22 nm). In PassMark, the Celeron Dual-Core T1700 scores 1,058 against the Celeron N2815's 1,068 — a 0.9% lead for the Celeron N2815.

Feature	Celeron Dual-Core T1700	Celeron N2815
Cores / Threads	2 / 2	2 / 2
Boost Clock	1.83 GHz	2.13 GHz+16%
Base Clock	—	1.86 GHz
L3 Cache	—	1 MB
L2 Cache	1 MB	1 MB
Process	65 nm	22 nm-66%
Architecture	Merom (2006−2008)	Bay Trail-M (2013−2014)
PassMark	1,058	1,068

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Celeron Dual-Core T1700 uses the PGA478 socket (PCIe 1.1), while the Celeron N2815 uses FCBGA1170 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR2-667 on the Celeron Dual-Core T1700 versus 1066 on the Celeron N2815 — the Celeron N2815 supports 59.8% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The Celeron N2815 supports up to 8 GB of RAM compared to 4 GB — 100% more capacity for professional workloads. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. PCIe lanes: 0 (Celeron Dual-Core T1700) vs 4 (Celeron N2815) — the Celeron N2815 offers 4 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: GL40,GM45 (Celeron Dual-Core T1700) and FCBGA1170 (Celeron N2815).

Feature	Celeron Dual-Core T1700	Celeron N2815
Socket	PGA478	FCBGA1170
PCIe Generation	PCIe 1.1	PCIe 2.0+82%
Max RAM Speed	DDR2-667	1066+60%
Max RAM Capacity	4 GB	8 GB+100%
RAM Channels	2	2
ECC Support	No	No
PCIe Lanes	0	4

🔧

Advanced Features

Neither processor supports overclocking. Virtualization support: No (Celeron Dual-Core T1700) vs true (Celeron N2815). The Celeron N2815 includes integrated graphics (Intel HD Graphics (Bay Trail)), while the Celeron Dual-Core T1700 requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Celeron Dual-Core T1700 targets Budget. Direct competitor: Celeron Dual-Core T1700 rivals Pentium T2390; Celeron N2815 rivals AMD A4-1250.