Celeron M 900 vs Core i5-3337U

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 900 vs Core i5-3337U 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 900 vs Core i5-3337U: 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 900

2009

Why buy it

✅+0.4% higher PassMark.
✅Costs $139 less on MSRP ($86 MSRP vs $225 MSRP).
✅Delivers 162.6% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 24.4 vs 9.3 PassMark/$ ($86 MSRP vs $225 MSRP).
✅Draws 1W instead of 512W, a 511W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌No integrated graphics, while Core i5-3337U can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Core i5-3337U

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 900 needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (2,093 vs 2,101).
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 9.3 vs 24.4 PassMark/$ ($225 MSRP vs $86 MSRP).
❌51100% higher power demand at 512W vs 1W.

Quick Answers

So, is Celeron M 900 better than Core i5-3337U?

It depends on what you want from the system. For gaming, Core i5-3337U is ahead with a 1.8% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. For rendering, compiling, streaming, and heavier multitasking, Celeron M 900 pulls ahead with 0.4% better PassMark.

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Celeron M 900 is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.4% better PassMark, backed by 1 cores and 1 threads.

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

Celeron M 900 is the better buy right now. Celeron M 900 comes in $139 cheaper on MSRP at $86 MSRP versus $225 MSRP, and it still gives you 0.4% better PassMark. The compromise is that Core i5-3337U is still the better pure gaming CPU with a 1.8% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. It is also 162.6% better value on MSRP (24.4 vs 9.3 PassMark/$), 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 i5-3337U makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2013 vs 2009). That makes it the safer long-term bet.

Celeron M 900 vs Core i5-3337U Technical Specifications

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

Celeron M 900

The Celeron M 900 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 1 April 2009 (16 years ago). It is based on the Penryn (2008−2011) architecture. It features 1 cores and 1 threads. Max frequency: 2.2 GHz. L2 cache: 1 MB. Built on 45 nm process technology. Socket: PGA478. Thermal design power (TDP): 1 MB. Passmark benchmark score: 2,101 points. Launch price was $70.

Core i5-3337U

The Core i5-3337U 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 1.8 GHz, with boost up to 2.7 GHz. L3 cache: 3 MB (total). L2 cache: 256K (per core). Built on 22 nm process technology. Socket: BGA1023. Thermal design power (TDP): 17 Watt. Memory support: DDR3/L/-RS 1333/1600. Passmark benchmark score: 2,093 points. Launch price was $225.

⚡

Processing Power

The Celeron M 900 packs 1 cores / 1 threads, while the Core i5-3337U offers 2 cores / 4 threads — the Core i5-3337U has 1 more core. Boost clocks reach 2.2 GHz on the Celeron M 900 versus 2.7 GHz on the Core i5-3337U — a 20.4% clock advantage for the Core i5-3337U. The Celeron M 900 uses the Penryn (2008−2011) architecture (45 nm), while the Core i5-3337U uses Ivy Bridge (2012−2013) (22 nm). In PassMark, the Celeron M 900 scores 2,101 against the Core i5-3337U's 2,093 — a 0.4% lead for the Celeron M 900.

Feature	Celeron M 900	Core i5-3337U
Cores / Threads	1 / 1	2 / 4+100%
Boost Clock	2.2 GHz	2.7 GHz+23%
Base Clock	—	1.8 GHz
L3 Cache	—	3 MB (total)
L2 Cache	1 MB	256K (per core)+25500%
Process	45 nm	22 nm-51%
Architecture	Penryn (2008−2011)	Ivy Bridge (2012−2013)
PassMark	2,101	2,093

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Celeron M 900 uses the PGA478 socket (PCIe 1.1), while the Core i5-3337U uses BGA1023 (PCIe 3.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.

Feature	Celeron M 900	Core i5-3337U
Socket	PGA478	BGA1023
PCIe Generation	PCIe 1.1	PCIe 3.0+173%
Max RAM Speed	—	1600
Max RAM Capacity	—	32
RAM Channels	—	2
ECC Support	—	No
PCIe Lanes	—	16

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization: not specified (Celeron M 900) / true (Core i5-3337U). The Core i5-3337U includes integrated graphics (Intel HD Graphics 4000), while the Celeron M 900 requires a dedicated GPU. Direct competitor: Core i5-3337U rivals AMD A8-4555M.

Feature	Celeron M 900	Core i5-3337U
Integrated GPU	—	Yes
IGPU Model	—	Intel HD Graphics 4000
Unlocked	—	No
AVX-512	—	No
Virtualization	—	true

💰

Value Analysis

At launch, the Celeron M 900 was priced at $86, while the Core i5-3337U came in at $225. On launch pricing ($86 vs $225), Celeron M 900 was $139 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Celeron M 900 delivers 24.4 pts/$ vs 9.3 pts/$ for the Core i5-3337U — making the Celeron M 900 the 89.7% better value option.

Feature	Celeron M 900	Core i5-3337U
MSRP	$86-62%	$225
Performance per Dollar	24.4+162%	9.3
Release Date	2009	2013

Search Celeron M 900 on Amazon

Search Core i5-3337U 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.