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 M 575 vs Core i3-3130M 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 M 575 vs Core i3-3130M: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

Celeron M 575

2008

Why buy it

✅+0.6% higher PassMark.
✅Costs $139 less on MSRP ($86 MSRP vs $225 MSRP).
✅Delivers 163.1% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 22.3 vs 8.5 PassMark/$ ($86 MSRP vs $225 MSRP).
✅Draws 1W instead of 512W, a 511W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌No integrated graphics, while Core i3-3130M can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Core i3-3130M

2013

Why buy it

✅100+% more PCIe lanes (16 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with Intel HD Graphics 4000, while Celeron M 575 needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (1,906 vs 1,917).
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 8.5 vs 22.3 PassMark/$ ($225 MSRP vs $86 MSRP).
❌51100% higher power demand at 512W vs 1W.

Quick Answers

So, is Celeron M 575 better than Core i3-3130M?

It depends on what you want from the system. For gaming, Core i3-3130M is ahead with a 0.1% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. For rendering, compiling, streaming, and heavier multitasking, Celeron M 575 pulls ahead with 0.6% better PassMark.

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Celeron M 575 is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.6% better PassMark, backed by 1 cores and 1 threads.

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

Celeron M 575 is the better buy right now. Celeron M 575 comes in $139 cheaper on MSRP at $86 MSRP versus $225 MSRP, and it still gives you 0.6% better PassMark. The compromise is that Core i3-3130M is still the better pure gaming CPU with a 0.1% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. It is also 163.1% better value on MSRP (22.3 vs 8.5 PassMark/$), so you are getting the faster CPU without taking a value hit on paper.

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

Core i3-3130M makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2013 vs 2008). That makes it the safer long-term bet.

Celeron M 575 vs Core i3-3130M Technical Specifications

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

Celeron M 575

The Celeron M 575 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 1 June 2008 (17 years ago). It is based on the Merom (2006−2008) architecture. It features 1 cores and 1 threads. Max frequency: 2 GHz. L2 cache: 1 MB. Built on 65 nm process technology. Socket: PGA478. Thermal design power (TDP): 1 MB. Passmark benchmark score: 1,917 points. Launch price was $86.

Core i3-3130M

The Core i3-3130M is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 1 January 2013 (12 years ago). It is based on the Ivy Bridge (2012−2013) architecture. It features 2 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 2.6 GHz, with boost up to 2.6 GHz. L3 cache: 3 MB (total). L2 cache: 256K (per core). Built on 22 nm process technology. Socket: PGA988. Thermal design power (TDP): 35 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 1,906 points. Launch price was $225.

⚡

Processing Power

The Celeron M 575 packs 1 cores / 1 threads, while the Core i3-3130M offers 2 cores / 4 threads — the Core i3-3130M has 1 more core. Boost clocks reach 2 GHz on the Celeron M 575 versus 2.6 GHz on the Core i3-3130M — a 26.1% clock advantage for the Core i3-3130M. The Celeron M 575 uses the Merom (2006−2008) architecture (65 nm), while the Core i3-3130M uses Ivy Bridge (2012−2013) (22 nm). In PassMark, the Celeron M 575 scores 1,917 against the Core i3-3130M's 1,906 — a 0.6% lead for the Celeron M 575.

Feature	Celeron M 575	Core i3-3130M
Cores / Threads	1 / 1	2 / 4+100%
Boost Clock	2 GHz	2.6 GHz+30%
Base Clock	—	2.6 GHz
L3 Cache	—	3 MB (total)
L2 Cache	1 MB	256K (per core)+25500%
Process	65 nm	22 nm-66%
Architecture	Merom (2006−2008)	Ivy Bridge (2012−2013)
PassMark	1,917	1,906

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Celeron M 575 uses the PGA478 socket (PCIe 1.1), while the Core i3-3130M uses PGA988 (PCIe 3.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches 800 on the Celeron M 575 versus 1600 on the Core i3-3130M — the Core i3-3130M supports 100% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The Core i3-3130M supports up to 32 of RAM compared to 4 — 700% more capacity for professional workloads. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. PCIe lanes: 0 (Celeron M 575) vs 16 (Core i3-3130M) — the Core i3-3130M offers 16 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: GL40,GM45 (Celeron M 575) and HM75,HM76,HM77,QM77,QS77 (Core i3-3130M).

Feature	Celeron M 575	Core i3-3130M
Socket	PGA478	PGA988
PCIe Generation	PCIe 1.1	PCIe 3.0+173%
Max RAM Speed	800	1600+100%
Max RAM Capacity	4	32+700%
RAM Channels	2	2
ECC Support	No	No
PCIe Lanes	0	16

🔧

Advanced Features

Neither processor supports overclocking. Virtualization support: false (Celeron M 575) vs true (Core i3-3130M). The Core i3-3130M includes integrated graphics (Intel HD Graphics 4000), while the Celeron M 575 requires a dedicated GPU. Direct competitor: Celeron M 575 rivals Mobile Sempron SI-40; Core i3-3130M rivals AMD A8-4500M.

Feature	Celeron M 575	Core i3-3130M
Integrated GPU	No	Yes
IGPU Model	None	Intel HD Graphics 4000
Unlocked	No	No
AVX-512	No	No
Virtualization	false	true

💰

Value Analysis

At launch, the Celeron M 575 was priced at $86, while the Core i3-3130M came in at $225. On launch pricing ($86 vs $225), Celeron M 575 was $139 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Celeron M 575 delivers 22.3 pts/$ vs 8.5 pts/$ for the Core i3-3130M — making the Celeron M 575 the 89.8% better value option.

Feature	Celeron M 575	Core i3-3130M
MSRP	$86-62%	$225
Performance per Dollar	22.3+162%	8.5
Release Date	2008	2013

Search Celeron M 575 on Amazon

Search Core i3-3130M 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.