Celeron E3500 vs Core i3-390M

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 E3500 vs Core i3-390M 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 E3500 vs Core i3-390M: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

Celeron E3500

2010

Why buy it

✅Draws 65W instead of 512W, a 447W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (1,290 vs 1,292).
❌Launch MSRP is still $62 MSRP, while Core i3-390M mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
❌No integrated graphics, while Core i3-390M can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Core i3-390M

2011

Why buy it

✅+0.2% higher PassMark.
✅100+% more PCIe lanes (16 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with HD Graphics, while Celeron E3500 needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌687.7% higher power demand at 512W vs 65W.

Quick Answers

So, is Celeron E3500 better than Core i3-390M?

It depends on what you want from the system. For gaming, Celeron E3500 is ahead with a 1.9% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. For rendering, compiling, streaming, and heavier multitasking, Core i3-390M pulls ahead with 0.2% better PassMark.

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Core i3-390M is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.2% better PassMark, backed by 2 cores and 4 threads.

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

Celeron E3500 is the better buy right now. Celeron E3500 comes in at an unclear MSRP at $62 MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it still gives you a 1.9% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. The compromise is that Core i3-390M is still stronger for heavier multi-core work with 0.2% better PassMark. It is also 100.0% better value on MSRP (20.8 vs 0.0 PassMark/$), 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 i3-390M makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2011 vs 2010) and 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 E3500 vs Core i3-390M Technical Specifications

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

Celeron E3500

The Celeron E3500 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 29 August 2010 (15 years ago). It is based on the Wolfdale (2008−2010) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 2.7 GHz, with boost up to 2.7 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: 1,290 points. Launch price was $62.

Core i3-390M

The Core i3-390M is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 9 January 2011 (14 years ago). It is based on the Arrandale (2010−2011) architecture. It features 2 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 2.66 GHz, with boost up to 0.67 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: 1,292 points. Launch price was $39.

⚡

Processing Power

The Celeron E3500 packs 2 cores / 2 threads, matching the Core i3-390M's 2 cores. Boost clocks reach 2.7 GHz on the Celeron E3500 versus 0.67 GHz on the Core i3-390M — a 120.5% clock advantage for the Celeron E3500 (base: 2.7 GHz vs 2.66 GHz). The Celeron E3500 uses the Wolfdale (2008−2010) architecture (45 nm), while the Core i3-390M uses Arrandale (2010−2011) (32 nm). In PassMark, the Celeron E3500 scores 1,290 against the Core i3-390M's 1,292 — a 0.2% lead for the Core i3-390M. L3 cache: 0 kB on the Celeron E3500 vs 3 MB (total) on the Core i3-390M.

Feature	Celeron E3500	Core i3-390M
Cores / Threads	2 / 2	2 / 4
Boost Clock	2.7 GHz+303%	0.67 GHz
Base Clock	2.7 GHz+2%	2.66 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	1,290	1,292
Geekbench 6 Single	347	—
Geekbench 6 Multi	624	—

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Celeron E3500 uses the LGA775 socket (PCIe 1.1), while the Core i3-390M uses PGA988 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Both support up to DDR3-1066 memory speed. Both support up to 8 GB of RAM. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. PCIe lanes: 0 (Celeron E3500) vs 16 (Core i3-390M) — the Core i3-390M offers 16 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives.

Feature	Celeron E3500	Core i3-390M
Socket	LGA775	PGA988
PCIe Generation	PCIe 1.1	PCIe 2.0+82%
Max RAM Speed	DDR3-1066	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. Both support VT-x virtualization. The Core i3-390M includes integrated graphics (HD Graphics), while the Celeron E3500 requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Celeron E3500 targets Budget, Core i3-390M targets Mobile. Direct competitor: Celeron E3500 rivals Pentium E5200.