Celeron Dual-Core T3500 vs C-50
Celeron Dual-Core T3500
C-50
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 Dual-Core T3500 is positioned at rank 959 and the C-50 is on rank 777, so the C-50 offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar Celeron Dual-Core T3500
Performance Per Dollar C-50
Performance Comparison
About PassMark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
| Insight | Celeron Dual-Core T3500 | C-50 |
|---|---|---|
| Gaming | ✅ Superior gaming performance | ❌ Lower gaming performance |
| Workstation | ❌ Weaker in multi-core tasks | ✅ Better multi-core power |
| Price | ⚠️ Higher cost ($15) | ✅ More affordable ($0) |
| Longevity | 🛑 Legacy (Penryn (2008−2011) / 45 nm) | 🛑 Legacy (Ontario (2011−2012) / 40 nm) |
💎 Value Proposition
| Insight | Celeron Dual-Core T3500 | C-50 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ❌ Lower cost efficiency | ❌ Lower cost efficiency |
| Upfront Cost | ⚠️ Higher cost ($15) | ✅ More affordable ($0) |
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 Dual-Core T3500 and C-50
Celeron Dual-Core T3500
The Celeron Dual-Core T3500 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 26 September 2010 (15 years ago). It is based on the Penryn (2008−2011) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Max frequency: 2.1 GHz. L2 cache: 1 MB. Built on 45 nm process technology. Socket: P. Thermal design power (TDP): 1 MB. Passmark benchmark score: 1,275 points. Launch price was $80.
C-50
The C-50 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 4 January 2011 (14 years ago). It is based on the Ontario (2011−2012) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Max frequency: 1 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 512K (per core). Built on 40 nm process technology. Socket: FT1. Thermal design power (TDP): 9 Watt. Memory support: DDR3 Single-channel. Passmark benchmark score: 1,282 points. Launch price was $69.
Processing Power
Both the Celeron Dual-Core T3500 and C-50 share an identical 2-core/2-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 2.1 GHz on the Celeron Dual-Core T3500 versus 1 GHz on the C-50 — a 71% clock advantage for the Celeron Dual-Core T3500. The Celeron Dual-Core T3500 uses the Penryn (2008−2011) architecture (45 nm), while the C-50 uses Ontario (2011−2012) (40 nm). In PassMark, the Celeron Dual-Core T3500 scores 1,275 against the C-50's 1,282 — a 0.5% lead for the C-50.
| Feature | Celeron Dual-Core T3500 | C-50 |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 2 / 2 | 2 / 2 |
| Boost Clock | 2.1 GHz+110% | 1 GHz |
| L3 Cache | — | 0 kB |
| L2 Cache | 1 MB+100% | 512K (per core) |
| Process | 45 nm | 40 nm-11% |
| Architecture | Penryn (2008−2011) | Ontario (2011−2012) |
| PassMark | 1,275 | 1,282 |
Memory & Platform
The Celeron Dual-Core T3500 uses the P socket (PCIe 1.1), while the C-50 uses FT1 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches 800 on the Celeron Dual-Core T3500 versus DDR3-1066 on the C-50 — the Celeron Dual-Core T3500 supports 198.5% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The Celeron Dual-Core T3500 supports up to 8 of RAM compared to 4 GB — 66.7% more capacity for professional workloads. Memory channels: 2 (Celeron Dual-Core T3500) vs 1 (C-50). PCIe lanes: 0 (Celeron Dual-Core T3500) vs 4 (C-50) — the C-50 offers 4 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: GL40,GM45,GM47 (Celeron Dual-Core T3500) and AMD BGA413 (C-50).
| Feature | Celeron Dual-Core T3500 | C-50 |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | P | FT1 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 1.1 | PCIe 2.0+82% |
| Max RAM Speed | 800+26567% | DDR3-1066 |
| Max RAM Capacity | 8 | 4 GB+52428700% |
| RAM Channels | 2+100% | 1 |
| ECC Support | ❌ | ❌ |
| PCIe Lanes | 0 | 4 |
Advanced Features
Virtualization: false (Celeron Dual-Core T3500) / not specified (C-50). The C-50 includes integrated graphics (Radeon HD 6250), while the Celeron Dual-Core T3500 requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Celeron Dual-Core T3500 targets Budget. Direct competitor: Celeron Dual-Core T3500 rivals Pentium T4400.
| Feature | Celeron Dual-Core T3500 | C-50 |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | No | Yes |
| IGPU Model | — | Radeon HD 6250 |
| Unlocked | No | — |
| AVX-512 | No | — |
| Virtualization | false | — |
| Target Use | Budget | — |
Top Performing CPUs
The most powerful cpus ranked by PassMark CPU Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar CPU comparisons based on Celeron Dual-Core T3500 and C-50
