Celeron G465 vs Celeron N2806

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 G465 vs Celeron N2806 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 G465 vs Celeron N2806: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

Celeron G465

2012

Why buy it

✅100+% more PCIe lanes (16 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with HD Graphics (Sandy Bridge), while Celeron N2806 needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (1,185 vs 1,195).
❌Launch MSRP is still $70 MSRP, while Celeron N2806 mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
❌775% higher power demand at 35W vs 4W.

Celeron N2806

2013

Why buy it

✅Draws 4W instead of 35W, a 31W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌No integrated graphics, while Celeron G465 can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Quick Answers

So, is Celeron N2806 better than Celeron G465?

Yes. Celeron N2806 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, 0.8% 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, Celeron N2806 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, Celeron N2806 is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.8% better PassMark, backed by 2 cores and 2 threads.

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

Celeron N2806 is still the much better call for a fresh build. Celeron N2806 comes in at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus $70 MSRP, and it still gives you a 2.2% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. Celeron G465 only looks stronger on raw value math because it is extremely cheap, but that usually means used-market pricing on an obsolete 2012 platform. Even with 100.0% better value on paper (16.9 vs 0.0 PassMark/$), 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?

Celeron N2806 makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2013 vs 2012) and more multi-core headroom with 2 cores / 2 threads instead of 1/2. That extra compute headroom is more likely to matter as games, background tasks, and creator workloads get heavier.

Celeron G465 vs Celeron N2806 Technical Specifications

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

Celeron G465

The Celeron G465 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 1 September 2012 (13 years ago). It is based on the Sandy Bridge (2011−2013) architecture. It features 1 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 1.9 GHz, with boost up to 1.9 GHz. L3 cache: 1.5 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: 1,185 points. Launch price was $80.

Celeron N2806

The Celeron N2806 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 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 1.6 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): 4.5 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 1,195 points. Launch price was $107.

⚡

Processing Power

The Celeron G465 packs 1 cores / 2 threads, while the Celeron N2806 offers 2 cores / 2 threads — the Celeron N2806 has 1 more core. Boost clocks reach 1.9 GHz on the Celeron G465 versus 2 GHz on the Celeron N2806 — a 5.1% clock advantage for the Celeron N2806 (base: 1.9 GHz vs 1.6 GHz). The Celeron G465 uses the Sandy Bridge (2011−2013) architecture (32 nm), while the Celeron N2806 uses Bay Trail-M (2013−2014) (22 nm). In PassMark, the Celeron G465 scores 1,185 against the Celeron N2806's 1,195 — a 0.8% lead for the Celeron N2806. L3 cache: 1.5 MB on the Celeron G465 vs 0 kB on the Celeron N2806.

Feature	Celeron G465	Celeron N2806
Cores / Threads	1 / 2	2 / 2+100%
Boost Clock	1.9 GHz	2 GHz+5%
Base Clock	1.9 GHz+19%	1.6 GHz
L3 Cache	1.5 MB	0 kB
L2 Cache	256 kB	512K (per core)+100%
Process	32 nm	22 nm-31%
Architecture	Sandy Bridge (2011−2013)	Bay Trail-M (2013−2014)
PassMark	1,185	1,195
Geekbench 6 Single	300	—

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Celeron G465 uses the LGA1155 socket (PCIe 2.0), while the Celeron N2806 uses FCBGA1170 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.

Feature	Celeron G465	Celeron N2806
Socket	LGA1155	FCBGA1170
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 G465) / not specified (Celeron N2806). The Celeron G465 includes integrated graphics (HD Graphics (Sandy Bridge)), while the Celeron N2806 requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Celeron G465 targets Budget. Direct competitor: Celeron G465 rivals Pentium G630.