Celeron N3010 vs E1-2200

Celeron N3010 vs E1-2200 Performance Spectrum

Celeron N3010

2 / 2

735

0.0%

802

+9.1%

Athlon XP 3200+

Athlon 64 3300+

Mobile Athlon 64 3700+

Athlon 64 FX-55

Ryzen 7 4700G

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3955WX

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7955WX

Ryzen Threadripper 3990X

About PassMark

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 N3010 vs E1-2200 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 N3010 vs E1-2200: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

Celeron N3010

2016

Why buy it

✅Draws 4W instead of 9W, a 5W reduction.
✅100+% more PCIe lanes (4 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with Intel HD Graphics 400, while E1-2200 needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than E1-2200 across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (735 vs 802).
❌Launch MSRP is still $107 MSRP, while E1-2200 mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.

E1-2200

2013

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +11.0% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.

Trade-offs

❌125% higher power demand at 9W vs 4W.
❌No integrated graphics, while Celeron N3010 can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Quick Answers

So, is E1-2200 better than Celeron N3010?

Yes. E1-2200 is the better all-around CPU here. It gives you a 11.0% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data and 9.1% better PassMark, which is enough to make it the stronger overall pick.

Which one is better for gaming?

If gaming is the priority, E1-2200 is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 11.0% 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, E1-2200 is the stronger fit. You are getting 9.1% better PassMark, backed by 2 cores and 2 threads.

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

E1-2200 is the easy recommendation for a fresh desktop build. E1-2200 comes in at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus $107 MSRP, and it still gives you a 11.0% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. Celeron N3010 only looks good on raw value math because it is a cheap legacy laptop chip, not because it is a real desktop gaming recommendation. It simply does not keep up in modern games, especially when the gap is already 11.0% in the shared gaming data.

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

Celeron N3010 makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2016 vs 2013). That makes it the safer long-term bet.

Celeron N3010 vs E1-2200 Technical Specifications

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

Celeron N3010

The Celeron N3010 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 10 January 2016 (9 years ago). It is based on the Airmont (2016) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 1.04 GHz, with boost up to 2.24 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 1 MB. Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: FCBGA1170. Thermal design power (TDP): 4 Watt. Memory support: DDR3L-1600. Passmark benchmark score: 735 points. Launch price was $107.

E1-2200

The E1-2200 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 2014-01-01. It is based on the Kabini (2013−2014) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Max frequency: 1.05 GHz. L2 cache: 1024 kB. Built on 28 nm process technology. Socket: FT3. Thermal design power (TDP): 9 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 802 points. Launch price was $50.

⚡

Processing Power

Both the Celeron N3010 and E1-2200 share an identical 2-core/2-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 2.24 GHz on the Celeron N3010 versus 1.05 GHz on the E1-2200 — a 72.3% clock advantage for the Celeron N3010. The Celeron N3010 uses the Airmont (2016) architecture (14 nm), while the E1-2200 uses Kabini (2013−2014) (28 nm). In PassMark, the Celeron N3010 scores 735 against the E1-2200's 802 — a 8.7% lead for the E1-2200.

Feature	Celeron N3010	E1-2200
Cores / Threads	2 / 2	2 / 2
Boost Clock	2.24 GHz+113%	1.05 GHz
Base Clock	1.04 GHz	—
L3 Cache	0 kB	—
L2 Cache	1 MB	1024 kB
Process	14 nm-50%	28 nm
Architecture	Airmont (2016)	Kabini (2013−2014)
PassMark	735	802+9%

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Celeron N3010 uses the FCBGA1170 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the E1-2200 uses FT3 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.

Feature	Celeron N3010	E1-2200
Socket	FCBGA1170	FT3
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0+50%	PCIe 2.0
Max RAM Speed	1600	—
Max RAM Capacity	8	—
RAM Channels	2	—
ECC Support	No	—
PCIe Lanes	4	—

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization: true (Celeron N3010) / not specified (E1-2200). The Celeron N3010 includes integrated graphics (Intel HD Graphics 400), while the E1-2200 requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Celeron N3010 targets Budget Mobile.