Celeron E1400 vs Pentium SU4100

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 E1400 vs Pentium SU4100 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 E1400 vs Pentium SU4100: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

Celeron E1400

2008

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +6.1% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Costs $236 less on MSRP ($53 MSRP vs $289 MSRP).
✅Delivers 469.2% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 13.5 vs 2.4 PassMark/$ ($53 MSRP vs $289 MSRP).

Trade-offs

❌550% higher power demand at 65W vs 10W.

Pentium SU4100

2009

Why buy it

✅Draws 10W instead of 65W, a 55W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Celeron E1400 across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (685 vs 715).
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 2.4 vs 13.5 PassMark/$ ($289 MSRP vs $53 MSRP).

Quick Answers

So, is Celeron E1400 better than Pentium SU4100?

Yes. Celeron E1400 is the better all-around CPU here. It gives you a 6.1% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data and 4.4% better PassMark, which is enough to make it the stronger overall pick.

Which one is better for gaming?

If gaming is the priority, Celeron E1400 is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 6.1% 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 E1400 is the stronger fit. You are getting 4.4% better PassMark, backed by 2 cores and 2 threads.

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

Celeron E1400 is the better buy right now. Celeron E1400 comes in $236 cheaper on MSRP at $53 MSRP versus $289 MSRP, and it still gives you a 6.1% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. It is also 469.2% better value on MSRP (13.5 vs 2.4 PassMark/$), so you are getting the faster CPU without taking a value hit on paper.

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

Pentium SU4100 makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2009 vs 2008). That makes it the safer long-term bet.

Celeron E1400 vs Pentium SU4100 Technical Specifications

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

Celeron E1400

The Celeron E1400 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 20 April 2008 (17 years ago). It is based on the Allendale (2006−2009) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 2 GHz, with boost up to 2 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 512 kB (total). Built on 65 nm process technology. Socket: LGA775. Thermal design power (TDP): 65 Watt. Memory support: DDR1, DDR2, DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 715 points. Launch price was $57.

Pentium SU4100

The Pentium SU4100 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 2007-01-01. It is based on the Penryn (2008−2011) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 1.3 GHz, with boost up to 1.3 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 2 MB. Built on 45 nm process technology. Socket: BGA956. Thermal design power (TDP): 10 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 685 points. Launch price was $69.

⚡

Processing Power

Both the Celeron E1400 and Pentium SU4100 share an identical 2-core/2-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 2 GHz on the Celeron E1400 versus 1.3 GHz on the Pentium SU4100 — a 42.4% clock advantage for the Celeron E1400 (base: 2 GHz vs 1.3 GHz). The Celeron E1400 uses the Allendale (2006−2009) architecture (65 nm), while the Pentium SU4100 uses Penryn (2008−2011) (45 nm). In PassMark, the Celeron E1400 scores 715 against the Pentium SU4100's 685 — a 4.3% lead for the Celeron E1400. Both processors carry 0 kB of L3 cache.

Feature	Celeron E1400	Pentium SU4100
Cores / Threads	2 / 2	2 / 2
Boost Clock	2 GHz+54%	1.3 GHz
Base Clock	2 GHz+54%	1.3 GHz
L3 Cache	0 kB	0 kB
L2 Cache	512 kB (total)	2 MB+300%
Process	65 nm	45 nm-31%
Architecture	Allendale (2006−2009)	Penryn (2008−2011)
PassMark	715+4%	685
Geekbench 6 Single	260	—
Geekbench 6 Multi	470	—

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Celeron E1400 uses the LGA775 socket (PCIe 1.1), while the Pentium SU4100 uses BGA956 (PCIe 1.1) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.

Feature	Celeron E1400	Pentium SU4100
Socket	LGA775	BGA956
PCIe Generation	PCIe 1.1	PCIe 1.1
Max RAM Speed	DDR2-800	—
Max RAM Capacity	8 GB	—
RAM Channels	2	—
ECC Support	No	—
PCIe Lanes	0	—

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization: No (Celeron E1400) / not specified (Pentium SU4100). Primary use case: Celeron E1400 targets Budget. Direct competitor: Celeron E1400 rivals Pentium E2180.

Feature	Celeron E1400	Pentium SU4100
Integrated GPU	No	—
Unlocked	No	—
AVX-512	No	—
Virtualization	No	—
Target Use	Budget	—

💰

Value Analysis

At launch, the Celeron E1400 was priced at $53, while the Pentium SU4100 came in at $289. On launch pricing ($53 vs $289), Celeron E1400 was $236 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Celeron E1400 delivers 13.5 pts/$ vs 2.4 pts/$ for the Pentium SU4100 — making the Celeron E1400 the 140.2% better value option.

Feature	Celeron E1400	Pentium SU4100
MSRP	$53-82%	$289
Performance per Dollar	13.5+463%	2.4
Release Date	2008	2009

Search Celeron E1400 on Amazon

Search Pentium SU4100 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.