Celeron N2820 vs Celeron T1700

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 N2820 vs Celeron T1700 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 N2820 vs Celeron T1700: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

Celeron N2820

2013

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +3.5% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Draws 7W instead of 35W, a 28W reduction.
✅100+% more PCIe lanes (4 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with Intel HD Graphics (Bay Trail), while Celeron T1700 needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌Fewer obvious downsides in this matchup outside of normal market pricing swings.

Celeron T1700

2008

Why buy it

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Celeron N2820 across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (1,058 vs 1,061).
❌Launch MSRP is still $80 MSRP, while Celeron N2820 mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
❌400% higher power demand at 35W vs 7W.
❌No integrated graphics, while Celeron N2820 can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Quick Answers

So, is Celeron N2820 better than Celeron T1700?

Yes. Celeron N2820 is the better all-around CPU here. It gives you a 3.5% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data, 0.3% 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 N2820 is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 3.5% 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 N2820 is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.3% better PassMark, backed by 2 cores and 2 threads.

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

Celeron N2820 is still the much better call for a fresh build. Celeron N2820 comes in at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus $80 MSRP, and it still gives you a 3.5% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. Celeron T1700 only looks stronger on raw value math because it is extremely cheap, but that usually means used-market pricing on an obsolete 2008 platform. Even with 100.0% better value on paper (13.2 vs 0.0 PassMark/$), it really only makes sense as a cheap stopgap or a niche existing-platform option for someone already on PGA478.

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

Celeron N2820 makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2013 vs 2008). That extra compute headroom is more likely to matter as games, background tasks, and creator workloads get heavier.

Celeron N2820 vs Celeron T1700 Technical Specifications

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

Celeron N2820

The Celeron N2820 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 2.13 GHz, with boost up to 2.39 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 512K (per core). Built on 22 nm process technology. Socket: FCBGA1170. Thermal design power (TDP): 7.5 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 1,061 points. Launch price was $107.

Celeron T1700

The Celeron T1700 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 2007-01-01. Base frequency: 1.83 GHz. L3 cache: 1 MB L2 Cache. Built on 65 nm process technology. Socket: PGA478. Thermal design power (TDP): 35 Watt. Passmark benchmark score: 1,058 points. Launch price was $69.

⚡

Processing Power

The Celeron N2820 is built on the Bay Trail-M (2013−2014) architecture. In PassMark, the Celeron N2820 scores 1,061 against the Celeron T1700's 1,058 — a 0.3% lead for the Celeron N2820. L3 cache: 0 kB on the Celeron N2820 vs 1 MB L2 Cache on the Celeron T1700.

Feature	Celeron N2820	Celeron T1700
Cores / Threads	2 / 2	—
Boost Clock	2.39 GHz	—
Base Clock	2.13 GHz+16%	1.83 GHz
L3 Cache	0 kB	1 MB L2 Cache
L2 Cache	512K (per core)	—
Process	22 nm-66%	65 nm
Architecture	Bay Trail-M (2013−2014)	—
PassMark	1,061	1,058
Geekbench 6 Single	220	—
Geekbench 6 Multi	400	—

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Celeron N2820 uses the FCBGA1170 socket (PCIe 2.0), while the Celeron T1700 uses PGA478 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.

Feature	Celeron N2820	Celeron T1700
Socket	FCBGA1170	PGA478
PCIe Generation	PCIe 2.0	PCIe 2.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR3L-1066	—
Max RAM Capacity	8 GB	—
RAM Channels	2	—
ECC Support	No	—
PCIe Lanes	4	—

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization: VT-x (Celeron N2820) / not specified (Celeron T1700). The Celeron N2820 includes integrated graphics (Intel HD Graphics (Bay Trail)), while the Celeron T1700 requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Celeron N2820 targets Netbook. Direct competitor: Celeron N2820 rivals AMD A6-6310.