Celeron N3050 vs E2-1800

Celeron N3050 vs E2-1800 Performance Spectrum

Celeron N3050

2 / 2

1,099

0.0%

1,110

+1.0%

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 N3050 vs E2-1800 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 N3050 vs E2-1800: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

Celeron N3050

2015

Why buy it

✅Draws 6W instead of 18W, a 12W reduction.
✅100+% more PCIe lanes (4 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with Intel HD Graphics (Braswell), while E2-1800 needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than E2-1800 across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (1,099 vs 1,110).

E2-1800

2012

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +3.8% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.

Trade-offs

❌200% higher power demand at 18W vs 6W.
❌No integrated graphics, while Celeron N3050 can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Quick Answers

So, is E2-1800 better than Celeron N3050?

Yes. E2-1800 is the better all-around CPU here. It gives you a 3.8% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data and 1% better PassMark, which is enough to make it the stronger overall pick.

Which one is better for gaming?

If gaming is the priority, E2-1800 is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 3.8% 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, E2-1800 is the stronger fit. You are getting 1% better PassMark, backed by 2 cores and 2 threads.

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

E2-1800 still makes the most sense overall. E2-1800 comes in at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it still gives you a 3.8% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data.

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

Celeron N3050 makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2015 vs 2012). That makes it the safer long-term bet.

Celeron N3050 vs E2-1800 Technical Specifications

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

Celeron N3050

The Celeron N3050 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 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 1.6 GHz, with boost up to 2.16 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 1 MB. Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: FCBGA1170. Thermal design power (TDP): 6 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 1,099 points. Launch price was $107.

E2-1800

The E2-1800 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 2014-01-01. It is based on the Zacate (2011−2013) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Max frequency: 1.7 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 512K (per core). Built on 40 nm process technology. Socket: FT1. Thermal design power (TDP): 18 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 1,110 points. Launch price was $50.

⚡

Processing Power

Both the Celeron N3050 and E2-1800 share an identical 2-core/2-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 2.16 GHz on the Celeron N3050 versus 1.7 GHz on the E2-1800 — a 23.8% clock advantage for the Celeron N3050. The Celeron N3050 uses the Braswell (2015−2016) architecture (14 nm), while the E2-1800 uses Zacate (2011−2013) (40 nm). In PassMark, the Celeron N3050 scores 1,099 against the E2-1800's 1,110 — a 1% lead for the E2-1800. Both processors carry 0 kB of L3 cache.

Feature	Celeron N3050	E2-1800
Cores / Threads	2 / 2	2 / 2
Boost Clock	2.16 GHz+27%	1.7 GHz
Base Clock	1.6 GHz	—
L3 Cache	0 kB	0 kB
L2 Cache	1 MB	512K (per core)+51100%
Process	14 nm-65%	40 nm
Architecture	Braswell (2015−2016)	Zacate (2011−2013)
PassMark	1,099	1,110+1%
Geekbench 6 Single	221	—
Geekbench 6 Multi	440	—

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Celeron N3050 uses the FCBGA1170 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the E2-1800 uses FT1 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.

Feature	Celeron N3050	E2-1800
Socket	FCBGA1170	FT1
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0+50%	PCIe 2.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR3L-1600	—
Max RAM Capacity	8 GB	—
RAM Channels	2	—
ECC Support	No	—
PCIe Lanes	4	—

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization: VT-x / EPT (Celeron N3050) / not specified (E2-1800). The Celeron N3050 includes integrated graphics (Intel HD Graphics (Braswell)), while the E2-1800 requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Celeron N3050 targets Netbook. Direct competitor: Celeron N3050 rivals AMD E2-7110.