Celeron G1820TE vs Celeron N2920

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 G1820TE vs Celeron N2920 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 G1820TE vs Celeron N2920: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

Celeron G1820TE

2013

Why buy it

✅300% more PCIe lanes (16 vs 4) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (1,020 vs 1,030).
❌671.4% higher power demand at 54W vs 7W.

Celeron N2920

2013

Why buy it

✅+1% higher PassMark.
✅Draws 7W instead of 54W, a 47W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Fewer obvious downsides in this matchup outside of normal market pricing swings.

Quick Answers

So, is Celeron N2920 better than Celeron G1820TE?

It depends on what you want from the system. For gaming, Celeron G1820TE is ahead with a 1.1% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. For rendering, compiling, streaming, and heavier multitasking, Celeron N2920 pulls ahead with 1% better PassMark.

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Celeron N2920 is the stronger fit. You are getting 1% better PassMark, backed by 4 cores and 4 threads.

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

Celeron N2920 still makes the most sense overall. Celeron N2920 comes in at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it still gives you 1% better PassMark.

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

Celeron N2920 makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting more multi-core headroom with 4 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 G1820TE vs Celeron N2920 Technical Specifications

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

Celeron G1820TE

The Celeron G1820TE is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 2007-01-01. It is based on the Haswell (2013−2015) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 2.2 GHz, with boost up to 2.2 GHz. L3 cache: 3 MB (total). L2 cache: 256 kB (per core). Built on 22 nm process technology. Socket: LGA1150. Thermal design power (TDP): 54 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 1,020 points. Launch price was $69.

Celeron N2920

The Celeron N2920 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 1 December 2013 (12 years ago). It is based on the Bay Trail-M (2013−2014) architecture. It features 4 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 1.86 GHz, with boost up to 2 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 512K (per core). Built on 22 nm process technology. Socket: FCBGA1170. Thermal design power (TDP): 7.5 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 1,030 points. Launch price was $107.

⚡

Processing Power

The Celeron G1820TE packs 2 cores / 2 threads, while the Celeron N2920 offers 4 cores / 4 threads — the Celeron N2920 has 2 more cores. Boost clocks reach 2.2 GHz on the Celeron G1820TE versus 2 GHz on the Celeron N2920 — a 9.5% clock advantage for the Celeron G1820TE (base: 2.2 GHz vs 1.86 GHz). The Celeron G1820TE uses the Haswell (2013−2015) architecture (22 nm), while the Celeron N2920 uses Bay Trail-M (2013−2014) (22 nm). In PassMark, the Celeron G1820TE scores 1,020 against the Celeron N2920's 1,030 — a 1% lead for the Celeron N2920. L3 cache: 3 MB (total) on the Celeron G1820TE vs 0 kB on the Celeron N2920.

Feature	Celeron G1820TE	Celeron N2920
Cores / Threads	2 / 2	4 / 4+100%
Boost Clock	2.2 GHz+10%	2 GHz
Base Clock	2.2 GHz+18%	1.86 GHz
L3 Cache	3 MB (total)	0 kB
L2 Cache	256 kB (per core)	512K (per core)+100%
Process	22 nm	22 nm
Architecture	Haswell (2013−2015)	Bay Trail-M (2013−2014)
PassMark	1,020	1,030
Geekbench 6 Single	415	—
Geekbench 6 Multi	629	—

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Celeron G1820TE uses the LGA1150 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Celeron N2920 uses FCBGA1170 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR3-1333 on the Celeron G1820TE versus 1066 on the Celeron N2920 — the Celeron G1820TE supports 25% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The Celeron G1820TE supports up to 32 GB of RAM compared to 8 GB — 300% more capacity for professional workloads. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. PCIe lanes: 16 (Celeron G1820TE) vs 4 (Celeron N2920) — the Celeron G1820TE offers 12 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: H81,B85,H87,Z87,H97,Z97 (Celeron G1820TE) and FCBGA1170 (Celeron N2920).

Feature	Celeron G1820TE	Celeron N2920
Socket	LGA1150	FCBGA1170
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0+50%	PCIe 2.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR3-1333+25%	1066
Max RAM Capacity	32 GB+300%	8 GB
RAM Channels	2	2
ECC Support	Yes	No
PCIe Lanes	16+300%	4

🔧

Advanced Features

Neither processor supports overclocking. Virtualization support: VT-x (Celeron G1820TE) vs true (Celeron N2920). Both include integrated graphics — HD Graphics (Haswell) (Celeron G1820TE) and Intel HD Graphics (Bay Trail) (Celeron N2920) — useful as a fallback for troubleshooting or display output without a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Celeron G1820TE targets Budget. Direct competitor: Celeron G1820TE rivals Pentium G3220T; Celeron N2920 rivals AMD A4-6210.