Celeron G1820TE vs Core i3-330M

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 Core i3-330M 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 Core i3-330M: 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

✅+30.9% higher Geekbench single-core performance for gaming and desktop responsiveness.
✅Draws 54W instead of 512W, a 458W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Lower Geekbench multi-core (629 vs 689).

Core i3-330M

2010

Why buy it

✅+9.5% higher Geekbench multi-core.

Trade-offs

❌Lower Geekbench single-core performance for gaming (317 vs 415).
❌848.1% higher power demand at 512W vs 54W.

Quick Answers

So, is Celeron G1820TE better than Core i3-330M?

It depends on what you want from the system. For gaming, Celeron G1820TE is ahead with a 0.6% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. For rendering, compiling, streaming, and heavier multitasking, Core i3-330M pulls ahead with 9.5% better Geekbench multi-core.

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Core i3-330M is the stronger fit. You are getting 9.5% better Geekbench multi-core, backed by 2 cores and 4 threads.

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

Celeron G1820TE still makes the most sense overall. Celeron G1820TE comes in at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it still gives you a 0.6% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data.

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

Celeron G1820TE makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2013 vs 2010). That makes it the safer long-term bet.

Celeron G1820TE vs Core i3-330M 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.

Core i3-330M

The Core i3-330M is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 7 January 2010 (15 years ago). It is based on the Arrandale (2010−2011) architecture. It features 2 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 2.13 GHz, with boost up to 0.13 GHz. L3 cache: 3 MB (total). L2 cache: 256 kB (per core). Built on 32 nm process technology. Socket: PGA988. Thermal design power (TDP): 35 Watt. Memory support: DDR3-800, DDR3-1066. Passmark benchmark score: 1,032 points. Launch price was $49.

⚡

Processing Power

The Celeron G1820TE packs 2 cores / 2 threads, matching the Core i3-330M's 2 cores. Boost clocks reach 2.2 GHz on the Celeron G1820TE versus 0.13 GHz on the Core i3-330M — a 177.7% clock advantage for the Celeron G1820TE (base: 2.2 GHz vs 2.13 GHz). The Celeron G1820TE uses the Haswell (2013−2015) architecture (22 nm), while the Core i3-330M uses Arrandale (2010−2011) (32 nm). In PassMark, the Celeron G1820TE scores 1,020 against the Core i3-330M's 1,032 — a 1.2% lead for the Core i3-330M. Geekbench 6 single-core — the metric most relevant to gaming — records 415 vs 317, a 26.8% lead for the Celeron G1820TE that directly translates to higher frame rates. Multi-core Geekbench: 629 vs 689 (9.1% advantage for the Core i3-330M). Both processors carry 3 MB (total) of L3 cache.

Feature	Celeron G1820TE	Core i3-330M
Cores / Threads	2 / 2	2 / 4
Boost Clock	2.2 GHz+1592%	0.13 GHz
Base Clock	2.2 GHz+3%	2.13 GHz
L3 Cache	3 MB (total)	3 MB (total)
L2 Cache	256 kB (per core)	256 kB (per core)
Process	22 nm-31%	32 nm
Architecture	Haswell (2013−2015)	Arrandale (2010−2011)
PassMark	1,020	1,032+1%
Geekbench 6 Single	415+31%	317
Geekbench 6 Multi	629	689+10%

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Celeron G1820TE uses the LGA1150 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Core i3-330M uses PGA988 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR3-1333 on the Celeron G1820TE versus DDR3-1066 on the Core i3-330M — 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. Both provide 16 PCIe lanes. Chipset compatibility: H81,B85,H87,Z87,H97,Z97 (Celeron G1820TE) and HM55,PM55,QM57 (Core i3-330M).

Feature	Celeron G1820TE	Core i3-330M
Socket	LGA1150	PGA988
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0+50%	PCIe 2.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR3-1333+25%	DDR3-1066
Max RAM Capacity	32 GB+300%	8 GB
RAM Channels	2	2
ECC Support	Yes	No
PCIe Lanes	16	16

🔧

Advanced Features

Neither processor supports overclocking. Virtualization support: VT-x (Celeron G1820TE) vs VT-x / EPT (Core i3-330M). Both include integrated graphics — HD Graphics (Haswell) (Celeron G1820TE) and Intel HD Graphics (Arrandale) (Core i3-330M) — useful as a fallback for troubleshooting or display output without a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Celeron G1820TE targets Budget, Core i3-330M targets Legacy Budget. Direct competitor: Celeron G1820TE rivals Pentium G3220T; Core i3-330M rivals AMD Athlon II P320.

Feature	Celeron G1820TE	Core i3-330M
Integrated GPU	Yes	Yes
IGPU Model	HD Graphics (Haswell)	Intel HD Graphics (Arrandale)
Unlocked	No	No
AVX-512	No	No
Virtualization	VT-x	VT-x / EPT
Target Use	Budget	Legacy Budget