Celeron G465 vs E-300

Celeron G465 vs E-300 Performance Spectrum

Celeron G465

1 / 1

1,185

+0.8%

1,176

0.0%

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 G465 vs E-300 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 E-300: 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.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 16.9 vs 19.6 PassMark/$ ($70 MSRP vs $60 MSRP).
❌94.4% higher power demand at 35W vs 18W.

E-300

2011

Why buy it

✅Costs $10 less on MSRP ($60 MSRP vs $70 MSRP).
✅Delivers 15.8% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 19.6 vs 16.9 PassMark/$ ($60 MSRP vs $70 MSRP).
✅Draws 18W instead of 35W, a 17W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (1,176 vs 1,185).

Quick Answers

So, is Celeron G465 better than E-300?

Yes. Celeron G465 is the better all-around CPU here. It gives you a 1.2% 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 G465 is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 1.2% 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 G465 is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.8% better PassMark, backed by 1 cores and 2 threads.

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

Celeron G465 is the easy recommendation for a fresh desktop build. Celeron G465 comes in 16.7% more expensive on MSRP at $70 MSRP versus $60 MSRP, and it still gives you a 1.2% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. E-300 only looks good on raw value math because it is a cheap legacy laptop chip, not because it is a real desktop gaming recommendation. It simply does not keep up in modern games, especially when the gap is already 1.2% in the shared gaming data.

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

Celeron G465 makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2012 vs 2011) and more multi-core headroom with 1 cores / 2 threads instead of 2/2. That extra compute headroom is more likely to matter as games, background tasks, and creator workloads get heavier.

Celeron G465 vs E-300 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.

E-300

The E-300 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 22 August 2011 (14 years ago). It is based on the Zacate (2011−2013) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Max frequency: 1.3 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 512K (per core). Built on 40 nm process technology. Socket: FT1. Thermal design power (TDP): 18 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 1,176 points. Launch price was $69.

⚡

Processing Power

The Celeron G465 packs 1 cores / 2 threads, while the E-300 offers 2 cores / 2 threads — the E-300 has 1 more core. Boost clocks reach 1.9 GHz on the Celeron G465 versus 1.3 GHz on the E-300 — a 37.5% clock advantage for the Celeron G465. The Celeron G465 uses the Sandy Bridge (2011−2013) architecture (32 nm), while the E-300 uses Zacate (2011−2013) (40 nm). In PassMark, the Celeron G465 scores 1,185 against the E-300's 1,176 — a 0.8% lead for the Celeron G465. L3 cache: 1.5 MB on the Celeron G465 vs 0 kB on the E-300.

Feature	Celeron G465	E-300
Cores / Threads	1 / 2	2 / 2+100%
Boost Clock	1.9 GHz+46%	1.3 GHz
Base Clock	1.9 GHz	—
L3 Cache	1.5 MB	0 kB
L2 Cache	256 kB	512K (per core)+100%
Process	32 nm-20%	40 nm
Architecture	Sandy Bridge (2011−2013)	Zacate (2011−2013)
PassMark	1,185	1,176
Geekbench 6 Single	300	—

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Celeron G465 uses the LGA1155 socket (PCIe 2.0), while the E-300 uses FT1 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Both support up to DDR3-1066 memory speed. The Celeron G465 supports up to 32 GB of RAM compared to 8 GB — 300% more capacity for professional workloads. Memory channels: 2 (Celeron G465) vs 1 (E-300). PCIe lanes: 16 (Celeron G465) vs 0 (E-300) — the Celeron G465 offers 16 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives.

Feature	Celeron G465	E-300
Socket	LGA1155	FT1
PCIe Generation	PCIe 2.0	PCIe 2.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR3-1066	DDR3-1066
Max RAM Capacity	32 GB+300%	8 GB
RAM Channels	2+100%	1
ECC Support	No	No
PCIe Lanes	16	0

🔧

Advanced Features

Neither processor supports overclocking. Virtualization support: VT-x (Celeron G465) vs AMD-V (E-300). Both include integrated graphics — HD Graphics (Sandy Bridge) (Celeron G465) and Radeon HD 6310 (E-300) — useful as a fallback for troubleshooting or display output without a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Celeron G465 targets Budget, E-300 targets Budget Mobile. Direct competitor: Celeron G465 rivals Pentium G630.

Feature	Celeron G465	E-300
Integrated GPU	Yes	Yes
IGPU Model	HD Graphics (Sandy Bridge)	Radeon HD 6310
Unlocked	No	No
AVX-512	No	No
Virtualization	VT-x	AMD-V
Target Use	Budget	Budget Mobile

💰

Value Analysis

At launch, the Celeron G465 was priced at $70, while the E-300 came in at $60. On launch pricing ($70 vs $60), E-300 was $10 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Celeron G465 delivers 16.9 pts/$ vs 19.6 pts/$ for the E-300 — making the E-300 the 14.6% better value option.

Feature	Celeron G465	E-300
MSRP	$70	$60-14%
Performance per Dollar	16.9	19.6+16%
Release Date	2012	2011

Search Celeron G465 on Amazon

Search E-300 on Amazon

Affiliate Disclosure

ChipVERSUS is a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to Amazon.com. We may earn a commission on qualifying purchases made through our links. This comes at no additional cost to you and helps support our work in providing comprehensive PC building guides and tools.

Amazon and the Amazon logo are trademarks of Amazon.com, Inc. or its affiliates.