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 E3400 vs Core i3-380M 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 E3400 vs Core i3-380M: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

Celeron E3400

2010

Why buy it

✅Includes a boxed cooler (true), unlike Core i3-380M.

Trade-offs

❌Lower Geekbench single-core performance for gaming (347 vs 450).
❌Lower Geekbench multi-core (624 vs 1,100).
❌
8.2% HIGHER MSRP
$53 MSRPvs$49 MSRP
❌85.7% higher power demand at 65W vs 35W.
❌No integrated graphics, while Core i3-380M can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Core i3-380M

2010

Why buy it

✅+29.7% higher Geekbench single-core performance for gaming and desktop responsiveness.
✅Costs $4 less on MSRP ($49 MSRP vs $53 MSRP).
✅Draws 35W instead of 65W, a 30W reduction.
✅100+% more PCIe lanes (16 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with Intel HD Graphics (Gen 1), while Celeron E3400 needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Celeron E3400.

Quick Answers

So, is Core i3-380M better than Celeron E3400?

Yes. Core i3-380M is the better all-around CPU here. It gives you a 1.9% average FPS lead across 49 shared CPU game tests in our data, 76.3% better Geekbench multi-core, 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, Core i3-380M is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 1.9% more average FPS across 49 shared CPU game tests.

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Core i3-380M is the stronger fit. You are getting 76.3% better Geekbench multi-core, backed by 2 cores and 4 threads.

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

Core i3-380M is the better buy right now. Core i3-380M comes in $4 cheaper on MSRP at $49 MSRP versus $53 MSRP, and it still gives you a 1.9% average FPS lead across 49 shared CPU game tests in our data. It is also 7.5% better value on MSRP (24.7 vs 23.0 PassMark/$), 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 i3-380M makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting 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 E3400 vs Core i3-380M Technical Specifications

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

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 i3-380M

The Core i3-380M is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 26 October 2010 (15 years ago). It is based on the Arrandale (2010−2011) architecture. It features 2 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 2.53 GHz, with boost up to 0.53 GHz. L3 cache: 3 MB (total). L2 cache: 256K (per core). Built on 32 nm process technology. Socket: PGA988. Thermal design power (TDP): 35 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 1,212 points. Launch price was $49.

⚡

Processing Power

The Celeron E3400 packs 2 cores / 2 threads, matching the Core i3-380M's 2 cores. Boost clocks reach 2.6 GHz on the Celeron E3400 versus 0.53 GHz on the Core i3-380M — a 132.3% clock advantage for the Celeron E3400 (base: 2.6 GHz vs 2.53 GHz). The Celeron E3400 uses the Wolfdale (2008−2010) architecture (45 nm), while the Core i3-380M uses Arrandale (2010−2011) (32 nm). In PassMark, the Celeron E3400 scores 1,220 against the Core i3-380M's 1,212 — a 0.7% lead for the Celeron E3400. Geekbench 6 single-core — the metric most relevant to gaming — records 347 vs 450, a 25.8% lead for the Core i3-380M that directly translates to higher frame rates. Multi-core Geekbench: 624 vs 1,100 (55.2% advantage for the Core i3-380M). L3 cache: 0 kB on the Celeron E3400 vs 3 MB (total) on the Core i3-380M.

Feature	Celeron E3400	Core i3-380M
Cores / Threads	2 / 2	2 / 4
Boost Clock	2.6 GHz+391%	0.53 GHz
Base Clock	2.6 GHz+3%	2.53 GHz
L3 Cache	0 kB	3 MB (total)
L2 Cache	1 MB (total)	256K (per core)+25500%
Process	45 nm	32 nm-29%
Architecture	Wolfdale (2008−2010)	Arrandale (2010−2011)
PassMark	1,220	1,212
Geekbench 6 Single	347	450+30%
Geekbench 6 Multi	624	1,100+76%

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Celeron E3400 uses the LGA775 socket (PCIe 1.1), while the Core i3-380M uses PGA988 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Both support up to 1066 memory speed. Both support up to 8 GB of RAM. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. PCIe lanes: 0 (Celeron E3400) vs 16 (Core i3-380M) — the Core i3-380M offers 16 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: G31,G41,P35,P45 (Celeron E3400) and HM55,HM57,QM57 (Core i3-380M).

Feature	Celeron E3400	Core i3-380M
Socket	LGA775	PGA988
PCIe Generation	PCIe 1.1	PCIe 2.0+82%
Max RAM Speed	1066	DDR3-1066
Max RAM Capacity	8 GB	8 GB
RAM Channels	2	2
ECC Support	No	No
PCIe Lanes	0	16

🔧

Advanced Features

Neither processor supports overclocking. Virtualization support: true (Celeron E3400) vs VT-x (Core i3-380M). The Core i3-380M includes integrated graphics (Intel HD Graphics (Gen 1)), while the Celeron E3400 requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Celeron E3400 targets Budget, Core i3-380M targets Legacy Laptop. Direct competitor: Celeron E3400 rivals Pentium E5200; Core i3-380M rivals AMD Athlon II P320.

Feature	Celeron E3400	Core i3-380M
Integrated GPU	No	Yes
IGPU Model	—	Intel HD Graphics (Gen 1)
Unlocked	No	No
AVX-512	No	No
Virtualization	true	VT-x
Target Use	Budget	Legacy Laptop

💰

Value Analysis

At launch, the Celeron E3400 was priced at $53, while the Core i3-380M came in at $49. On launch pricing ($53 vs $49), Core i3-380M was $4 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Celeron E3400 delivers 23.0 pts/$ vs 24.7 pts/$ for the Core i3-380M — making the Core i3-380M the 7.2% better value option.

Feature	Celeron E3400	Core i3-380M
MSRP	$53	$49-8%
Performance per Dollar	23.0	24.7+7%
Release Date	2010	2010

Search Celeron E3400 on Amazon

Search Core i3-380M 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.