Celeron G440 vs E2-3200

Celeron G440 vs E2-3200 Performance Spectrum

Celeron G440

1 / 1

1,035

0.0%

1,050

+1.4%

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3955WX

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7955WX

Ryzen Threadripper 3990X

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.

Celeron G440 vs E2-3200 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 G440 vs E2-3200: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

Celeron G440

2011

Why buy it

✅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 HD Graphics (Sandy Bridge), while E2-3200 needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (1,035 vs 1,050).
❌Launch MSRP is still $37 MSRP, while E2-3200 mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.

E2-3200

2011

Why buy it

Trade-offs

❌85.7% higher power demand at 65W vs 35W.
❌No integrated graphics, while Celeron G440 can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Quick Answers

So, is E2-3200 better than Celeron G440?

Yes. E2-3200 is the better all-around CPU here. It gives you a 2.2% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data, 1.4% better PassMark, 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, E2-3200 is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 2.2% more average FPS across 50 shared CPU game tests.

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, E2-3200 is the stronger fit. You are getting 1.4% better PassMark, backed by 2 cores and 2 threads.

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

E2-3200 is still the much better call for a fresh build. E2-3200 comes in at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus $37 MSRP, and it still gives you a 2.2% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. Celeron G440 only looks stronger on raw value math because it is extremely cheap, but that usually means used-market pricing on an obsolete 2011 platform. Even with 100.0% better value on paper (28.0 vs 0.0 PassMark/$), it really only makes sense as a cheap stopgap or a niche existing-platform option for someone already on LGA1155.

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

E2-3200 makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting more multi-core headroom with 2 cores / 2 threads instead of 1/1. That extra compute headroom is more likely to matter as games, background tasks, and creator workloads get heavier.

Celeron G440 vs E2-3200 Technical Specifications

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

Celeron G440

The Celeron G440 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 4 September 2011 (14 years ago). It is based on the Sandy Bridge (2011−2013) architecture. It features 1 cores and 1 threads. Base frequency is 1.6 GHz, with boost up to 1.6 GHz. L3 cache: 1 MB. L2 cache: 256 kB. Built on 32 nm process technology. Socket: LGA1155. Thermal design power (TDP): 35 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 1,035 points. Launch price was $45.

E2-3200

The E2-3200 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 2014-01-01. It is based on the Llano (2011−2012) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 2.4 GHz, with boost up to 2.4 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 512 kB (per core). Built on 32 nm process technology. Socket: FM1. Thermal design power (TDP): 65 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 1,050 points. Launch price was $50.

⚡

Processing Power

The Celeron G440 packs 1 cores / 1 threads, while the E2-3200 offers 2 cores / 2 threads — the E2-3200 has 1 more core. Boost clocks reach 1.6 GHz on the Celeron G440 versus 2.4 GHz on the E2-3200 — a 40% clock advantage for the E2-3200 (base: 1.6 GHz vs 2.4 GHz). The Celeron G440 uses the Sandy Bridge (2011−2013) architecture (32 nm), while the E2-3200 uses Llano (2011−2012) (32 nm). In PassMark, the Celeron G440 scores 1,035 against the E2-3200's 1,050 — a 1.4% lead for the E2-3200. L3 cache: 1 MB on the Celeron G440 vs 0 kB on the E2-3200.

Feature	Celeron G440	E2-3200
Cores / Threads	1 / 1	2 / 2+100%
Boost Clock	1.6 GHz	2.4 GHz+50%
Base Clock	1.6 GHz	2.4 GHz+50%
L3 Cache	1 MB	0 kB
L2 Cache	256 kB	512 kB (per core)+100%
Process	32 nm	32 nm
Architecture	Sandy Bridge (2011−2013)	Llano (2011−2012)
PassMark	1,035	1,050+1%
Geekbench 6 Single	300	—

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Celeron G440 uses the LGA1155 socket (PCIe 2.0), while the E2-3200 uses FM1 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.

Feature	Celeron G440	E2-3200
Socket	LGA1155	FM1
PCIe Generation	PCIe 2.0	PCIe 2.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR3-1066	—
Max RAM Capacity	32 GB	—
RAM Channels	2	—
ECC Support	No	—
PCIe Lanes	16	—

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization: VT-x (Celeron G440) / not specified (E2-3200). The Celeron G440 includes integrated graphics (HD Graphics (Sandy Bridge)), while the E2-3200 requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Celeron G440 targets Budget. Direct competitor: Celeron G440 rivals Pentium G630.