Celeron N3060 vs Celeron 847
Celeron N3060
Celeron 847
Performance Spectrum - CPU
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.
Value Upgrade Path
This is the official ChipVERSUS Value Rating, comparing raw performance (PassMark) per dollar. Components placed above yours deliver better value for money. The Celeron N3060 is positioned at rank 173 and the Celeron 847 is on rank 1093, so the Celeron N3060 offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar Celeron N3060
Performance Per Dollar Celeron 847
Performance Comparison
About PassMark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
| Insight | Celeron N3060 | Celeron 847 |
|---|---|---|
| Gaming | ✅ Superior gaming performance | ❌ Lower gaming performance |
| Workstation | ❌ Weaker in multi-core tasks | ✅ Better multi-core power |
| Price | ⚠️ Higher cost ($107) | ✅ More affordable ($15) |
| Longevity | 🛑 Legacy (Braswell (2015−2016) / 14 nm) | 🛑 Legacy (Sandy Bridge (2011−2013) / 32 nm) |
💎 Value Proposition
| Insight | Celeron N3060 | Celeron 847 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ❌ Lower cost efficiency | ✅ Better overall value (+615%) |
| Upfront Cost | ⚠️ Higher cost ($107) | ✅ More affordable ($15) |
Performance Check
To accurately isolate CPU performance, all benchmarks below use an NVIDIA RTX 4090 as the reference GPU. This eliminates GPU-side bottlenecks and highlights pure processing throughput differences between the CPUs.
Note: Real-world results may vary based on your actual GPU. CPU performance impact is more visible in processing-intensive titles and high-refresh-rate gaming scenarios.
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of Celeron N3060 and Celeron 847
Celeron N3060
The Celeron N3060 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 15 January 2016 (9 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 2.48 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: 1,267 points. Launch price was $107.
Celeron 847
The Celeron 847 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 19 June 2011 (14 years ago). It is based on the Sandy Bridge (2011−2013) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 1.1 GHz, with boost up to 1.1 GHz. L3 cache: 2 MB (total). L2 cache: 256K (per core). Built on 32 nm process technology. Socket: BGA1023. Thermal design power (TDP): 17 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 1,270 points. Launch price was $134.
Processing Power
Both the Celeron N3060 and Celeron 847 share an identical 2-core/2-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 2.48 GHz on the Celeron N3060 versus 1.1 GHz on the Celeron 847 — a 77.1% clock advantage for the Celeron N3060 (base: 1.6 GHz vs 1.1 GHz). The Celeron N3060 uses the Braswell (2015−2016) architecture (14 nm), while the Celeron 847 uses Sandy Bridge (2011−2013) (32 nm). In PassMark, the Celeron N3060 scores 1,267 against the Celeron 847's 1,270 — a 0.2% lead for the Celeron 847. L3 cache: 0 kB on the Celeron N3060 vs 2 MB (total) on the Celeron 847.
| Feature | Celeron N3060 | Celeron 847 |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 2 / 2 | 2 / 2 |
| Boost Clock | 2.48 GHz+125% | 1.1 GHz |
| Base Clock | 1.6 GHz+45% | 1.1 GHz |
| L3 Cache | 0 kB | 2 MB (total) |
| L2 Cache | 1 MB+300% | 256K (per core) |
| Process | 14 nm-56% | 32 nm |
| Architecture | Braswell (2015−2016) | Sandy Bridge (2011−2013) |
| PassMark | 1,267 | 1,270 |
| Geekbench 6 Single | — | 196 |
| Geekbench 6 Multi | — | 354 |
Memory & Platform
The Celeron N3060 uses the FCBGA1170 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Celeron 847 uses BGA1023 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches 1600 on the Celeron N3060 versus DDR3-1333 on the Celeron 847 — the Celeron N3060 supports 199.3% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The Celeron 847 supports up to 16 GB of RAM compared to 8 — 66.7% more capacity for professional workloads. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. PCIe lanes: 4 (Celeron N3060) vs 16 (Celeron 847) — the Celeron 847 offers 12 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: FCBGA1170 (Celeron N3060) and HM65,HM67 (Celeron 847).
| Feature | Celeron N3060 | Celeron 847 |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | FCBGA1170 | BGA1023 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 3.0+50% | PCIe 2.0 |
| Max RAM Speed | 1600+53233% | DDR3-1333 |
| Max RAM Capacity | 8 | 16 GB+209715100% |
| RAM Channels | 2 | 2 |
| ECC Support | ❌ | ❌ |
| PCIe Lanes | 4 | 16+300% |
Advanced Features
Neither processor supports overclocking. Virtualization support: true (Celeron N3060) vs VT-x (Celeron 847). Both include integrated graphics — Intel HD Graphics 400 (Celeron N3060) and HD Graphics (Sandy Bridge) (Celeron 847) — useful as a fallback for troubleshooting or display output without a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Celeron 847 targets Budget. Direct competitor: Celeron N3060 rivals AMD E2-9010; Celeron 847 rivals Pentium 967.
| Feature | Celeron N3060 | Celeron 847 |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | Yes | Yes |
| IGPU Model | Intel HD Graphics 400 | HD Graphics (Sandy Bridge) |
| Unlocked | No | No |
| AVX-512 | No | No |
| Virtualization | true | VT-x |
| Target Use | — | Budget |
Value Analysis
The Celeron N3060 launched at $107 MSRP, while the Celeron 847 debuted at $134.
| Feature | Celeron N3060 | Celeron 847 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $107-20% | $134 |
| Avg Price (30d) | — | $15 |
| Release Date | 2016 | 2011 |
Top Performing CPUs
The most powerful cpus ranked by PassMark CPU Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar CPU comparisons based on Celeron N3060 and Celeron 847
