Celeron N2808 vs Celeron U3600

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 N2808 vs Celeron U3600 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 N2808 vs Celeron U3600: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

Celeron N2808

2014

Why buy it

✅Draws 4W instead of 18W, a 14W reduction.
✅100+% more PCIe lanes (4 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with HD Graphics (Bay Trail), while Celeron U3600 needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Celeron U3600 across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (615 vs 625).

Celeron U3600

2011

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +5.0% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.

Trade-offs

❌Launch MSRP is still $134 MSRP, while Celeron N2808 mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
❌350% higher power demand at 18W vs 4W.
❌No integrated graphics, while Celeron N2808 can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Quick Answers

So, is Celeron U3600 better than Celeron N2808?

Yes. Celeron U3600 is the better all-around CPU here. It gives you a 5.0% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data and 1.6% better PassMark, which is enough to make it the stronger overall pick.

Which one is better for gaming?

If gaming is the priority, Celeron U3600 is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 5.0% 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 U3600 is the stronger fit. You are getting 1.6% better PassMark, backed by 2 cores and 2 threads.

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

Celeron U3600 is the better buy right now. Celeron U3600 comes in at an unclear MSRP at $134 MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it still gives you a 5.0% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. It is also 100.0% better value on MSRP (4.7 vs 0.0 PassMark/$), so you are getting the faster CPU without taking a value hit on paper.

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

Celeron N2808 makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2014 vs 2011). That makes it the safer long-term bet.

Celeron N2808 vs Celeron U3600 Technical Specifications

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

Celeron N2808

The Celeron N2808 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 2007-01-01. It is based on the Bay Trail-M (2013−2014) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 1.58 GHz, with boost up to 2.25 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: 615 points. Launch price was $69.

Celeron U3600

The Celeron U3600 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 2007-01-01. It is based on the Westmere (2010−2011) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 1.2 GHz, with boost up to 0.1 GHz. L3 cache: 2 MB. L2 cache: 512 kB. Built on 32 nm process technology. Socket: BGA1288. Thermal design power (TDP): 18 Watt. Memory support: DDR3-800. Passmark benchmark score: 625 points. Launch price was $69.

⚡

Processing Power

Both the Celeron N2808 and Celeron U3600 share an identical 2-core/2-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 2.25 GHz on the Celeron N2808 versus 0.1 GHz on the Celeron U3600 — a 183% clock advantage for the Celeron N2808 (base: 1.58 GHz vs 1.2 GHz). The Celeron N2808 uses the Bay Trail-M (2013−2014) architecture (22 nm), while the Celeron U3600 uses Westmere (2010−2011) (32 nm). In PassMark, the Celeron N2808 scores 615 against the Celeron U3600's 625 — a 1.6% lead for the Celeron U3600. L3 cache: 0 kB on the Celeron N2808 vs 2 MB on the Celeron U3600.

Feature	Celeron N2808	Celeron U3600
Cores / Threads	2 / 2	2 / 2
Boost Clock	2.25 GHz+2150%	0.1 GHz
Base Clock	1.58 GHz+32%	1.2 GHz
L3 Cache	0 kB	2 MB
L2 Cache	512K (per core)	512 kB
Process	22 nm-31%	32 nm
Architecture	Bay Trail-M (2013−2014)	Westmere (2010−2011)
PassMark	615	625+2%

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Celeron N2808 uses the FCBGA1170 socket (PCIe 2.0), while the Celeron U3600 uses BGA1288 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.

Feature	Celeron N2808	Celeron U3600
Socket	FCBGA1170	BGA1288
PCIe Generation	PCIe 2.0	PCIe 2.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR3L-1333	—
Max RAM Capacity	4 GB	—
RAM Channels	1	—
ECC Support	No	—
PCIe Lanes	4	—

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization: VT-x (Celeron N2808) / not specified (Celeron U3600). The Celeron N2808 includes integrated graphics (HD Graphics (Bay Trail)), while the Celeron U3600 requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Celeron N2808 targets Mobile.