Celeron N2830 vs Celeron N3150

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 N2830 vs Celeron N3150 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 N2830 vs Celeron N3150: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

Celeron N2830

2014

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +3.5% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.

Trade-offs

❌16.7% higher power demand at 7W vs 6W.

Celeron N3150

2015

Why buy it

✅Draws 6W instead of 7W, a 1W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Celeron N2830 across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (1,177 vs 1,185).

Quick Answers

So, is Celeron N2830 better than Celeron N3150?

Yes. Celeron N2830 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 and 0.7% better PassMark, which is enough to make it the stronger overall pick.

Which one is better for gaming?

If gaming is the priority, Celeron N2830 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 N2830 is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.7% better PassMark, backed by 2 cores and 2 threads.

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

Celeron N2830 still makes the most sense overall. Celeron N2830 comes in at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it still gives you a 3.5% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data.

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

Celeron N3150 makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2015 vs 2014). That makes it the safer long-term bet.

Celeron N2830 vs Celeron N3150 Technical Specifications

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

Celeron N2830

The Celeron N2830 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 23 February 2014 (11 years ago). It is based on the Bay Trail-M (2013−2014) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 2.16 GHz, with boost up to 2.41 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: 1,185 points. Launch price was $107.

Celeron N3150

The Celeron N3150 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 1 April 2015 (10 years ago). It is based on the Braswell (2015−2016) architecture. It features 4 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 1.6 GHz, with boost up to 2.08 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 2 MB. Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: FCBGA1170. Thermal design power (TDP): 6 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 1,177 points. Launch price was $107.

⚡

Processing Power

The Celeron N2830 packs 2 cores / 2 threads, while the Celeron N3150 offers 4 cores / 4 threads — the Celeron N3150 has 2 more cores. Boost clocks reach 2.41 GHz on the Celeron N2830 versus 2.08 GHz on the Celeron N3150 — a 14.7% clock advantage for the Celeron N2830 (base: 2.16 GHz vs 1.6 GHz). The Celeron N2830 uses the Bay Trail-M (2013−2014) architecture (22 nm), while the Celeron N3150 uses Braswell (2015−2016) (14 nm). In PassMark, the Celeron N2830 scores 1,185 against the Celeron N3150's 1,177 — a 0.7% lead for the Celeron N2830. Both processors carry 0 kB of L3 cache.

Feature	Celeron N2830	Celeron N3150
Cores / Threads	2 / 2	4 / 4+100%
Boost Clock	2.41 GHz+16%	2.08 GHz
Base Clock	2.16 GHz+35%	1.6 GHz
L3 Cache	0 kB	0 kB
L2 Cache	512K (per core)+25500%	2 MB
Process	22 nm	14 nm-36%
Architecture	Bay Trail-M (2013−2014)	Braswell (2015−2016)
PassMark	1,185	1,177

🧠

Memory & Platform

Both processors use the FCBGA1170 socket with PCIe 2.0. Maximum memory speed reaches 1333 on the Celeron N2830 versus 1600 on the Celeron N3150 — the Celeron N3150 supports 20% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. Both support up to 8 of RAM. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. Both provide 4 PCIe lanes. Chipset compatibility: FCBGA1170 (Celeron N2830) and FCBGA1170 (Celeron N3150).

Feature	Celeron N2830	Celeron N3150
Socket	FCBGA1170	FCBGA1170
PCIe Generation	PCIe 2.0	PCIe 3.0+50%
Max RAM Speed	1333	1600+20%
Max RAM Capacity	8	8
RAM Channels	2	2
ECC Support	No	No
PCIe Lanes	4	4

🔧

Advanced Features

Neither processor supports overclocking. Both support true virtualization. Both include integrated graphics — Intel HD Graphics (Bay Trail) (Celeron N2830) and Intel HD Graphics (Braswell) (Celeron N3150) — useful as a fallback for troubleshooting or display output without a dedicated GPU. Direct competitor: Celeron N2830 rivals AMD A6-6310; Celeron N3150 rivals AMD E2-7110.