CPU
GPU
Celeron E3400
Core i3-3217U
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 E3400 is positioned at rank 727 and the Core i3-3217U is on rank 684, so the Core i3-3217U offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar Celeron E3400
Performance Per Dollar Core i3-3217U
Performance Comparison
About PassMark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
| Insight | Celeron E3400 | Core i3-3217U |
|---|---|---|
| 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 (Wolfdale (2008−2010) / 45 nm) | 🛑 Legacy (Ivy Bridge (2012−2013) / 22 nm) |
💎 Value Proposition
| Insight | Celeron E3400 | Core i3-3217U |
|---|---|---|
| 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 E3400 and Core i3-3217U
Celeron E3400
The Celeron E3400 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 17 January 2010 (15 years ago). It is based on the Wolfdale (2008−2010) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 2.6 GHz, with boost up to 2.6 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 1 MB (total). Built on 45 nm process technology. Socket: LGA775. Thermal design power (TDP): 65 Watt. Memory support: DDR1, DDR2, DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 1,220 points. Launch price was $76.
Core i3-3217U
The Core i3-3217U is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 1 June 2012 (13 years ago). It is based on the Ivy Bridge (2012−2013) architecture. It features 2 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 1.8 GHz, with boost up to 1.8 GHz. L3 cache: 3 MB (total). L2 cache: 256K (per core). Built on 22 nm process technology. Socket: BGA1023. Thermal design power (TDP): 17 Watt. Memory support: DDR3/L/-RS 1333/1600. Passmark benchmark score: 1,226 points. Launch price was $225.
Processing Power
The Celeron E3400 packs 2 cores / 2 threads, matching the Core i3-3217U's 2 cores. Boost clocks reach 2.6 GHz on the Celeron E3400 versus 1.8 GHz on the Core i3-3217U — a 36.4% clock advantage for the Celeron E3400 (base: 2.6 GHz vs 1.8 GHz). The Celeron E3400 uses the Wolfdale (2008−2010) architecture (45 nm), while the Core i3-3217U uses Ivy Bridge (2012−2013) (22 nm). In PassMark, the Celeron E3400 scores 1,220 against the Core i3-3217U's 1,226 — a 0.5% lead for the Core i3-3217U. L3 cache: 0 kB on the Celeron E3400 vs 3 MB (total) on the Core i3-3217U.
| Feature | Celeron E3400 | Core i3-3217U |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 2 / 2 | 2 / 4 |
| Boost Clock | 2.6 GHz+44% | 1.8 GHz |
| Base Clock | 2.6 GHz+44% | 1.8 GHz |
| L3 Cache | 0 kB | 3 MB (total) |
| L2 Cache | 1 MB (total)+300% | 256K (per core) |
| Process | 45 nm | 22 nm-51% |
| Architecture | Wolfdale (2008−2010) | Ivy Bridge (2012−2013) |
| PassMark | 1,220 | 1,226 |
| Geekbench 6 Single | 347 | — |
| Geekbench 6 Multi | 624 | — |
Memory & Platform
The Celeron E3400 uses the LGA775 socket (PCIe 1.1), while the Core i3-3217U uses BGA1023 (PCIe 3.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches 1066 on the Celeron E3400 versus 1600 on the Core i3-3217U — the Core i3-3217U supports 40.1% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The Core i3-3217U supports up to 32 of RAM compared to 8 — 120% more capacity for professional workloads. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. PCIe lanes: 0 (Celeron E3400) vs 16 (Core i3-3217U) — the Core i3-3217U offers 16 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: G31,G41,P35,P45 (Celeron E3400) and HM76,UM77,QM77,QS77 (Core i3-3217U).
| Feature | Celeron E3400 | Core i3-3217U |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | LGA775 | BGA1023 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 1.1 | PCIe 3.0+173% |
| Max RAM Speed | 1066 | 1600+50% |
| Max RAM Capacity | 8 | 32+300% |
| RAM Channels | 2 | 2 |
| ECC Support | ❌ | ❌ |
| PCIe Lanes | 0 | 16 |
Advanced Features
Neither processor supports overclocking. Both support true virtualization. The Core i3-3217U includes integrated graphics (Intel HD Graphics 4000), while the Celeron E3400 requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Celeron E3400 targets Budget. Direct competitor: Celeron E3400 rivals Pentium E5200; Core i3-3217U rivals AMD A6-4455M.
| Feature | Celeron E3400 | Core i3-3217U |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | No | Yes |
| IGPU Model | — | Intel HD Graphics 4000 |
| Unlocked | No | No |
| AVX-512 | No | No |
| Virtualization | true | true |
| 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 E3400 and Core i3-3217U
