Celeron N3150 vs Core 2 Duo P9700

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 N3150 vs Core 2 Duo P9700 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 N3150 vs Core 2 Duo P9700: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

Celeron N3150

2015

Why buy it

✅Draws 6W instead of 28W, a 22W reduction.
✅100+% more PCIe lanes (4 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with Intel HD Graphics (Braswell), while Core 2 Duo P9700 needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (1,177 vs 1,178).

Core 2 Duo P9700

2009

Why buy it

Trade-offs

❌366.7% higher power demand at 28W vs 6W.
❌No integrated graphics, while Celeron N3150 can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Quick Answers

So, is Core 2 Duo P9700 better than Celeron N3150?

Yes. Core 2 Duo P9700 is the better all-around CPU here. It gives you a 1.6% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data and 0.1% better PassMark, which is enough to make it the stronger overall pick.

Which one is better for gaming?

If gaming is the priority, Core 2 Duo P9700 is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 1.6% 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, Core 2 Duo P9700 is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.1% better PassMark, backed by 2 cores and 2 threads.

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

Core 2 Duo P9700 still makes the most sense overall. Core 2 Duo P9700 comes in at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it still gives you a 1.6% 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 2009). That makes it the safer long-term bet.

Celeron N3150 vs Core 2 Duo P9700 Technical Specifications

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

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.

Core 2 Duo P9700

The Core 2 Duo P9700 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 2 June 2009 (16 years ago). It is based on the Penryn (2008−2011) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 2.8 GHz, with boost up to 2.8 GHz. L3 cache: 6 MB L2 Cache. L2 cache: 6 MB (total). Built on 45 nm process technology. Socket: PGA478. Thermal design power (TDP): 28 Watt. Memory support: DDR2, DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 1,178 points. Launch price was $348.

⚡

Processing Power

The Celeron N3150 packs 4 cores / 4 threads, while the Core 2 Duo P9700 offers 2 cores / 2 threads — the Celeron N3150 has 2 more cores. Boost clocks reach 2.08 GHz on the Celeron N3150 versus 2.8 GHz on the Core 2 Duo P9700 — a 29.5% clock advantage for the Core 2 Duo P9700 (base: 1.6 GHz vs 2.8 GHz). The Celeron N3150 uses the Braswell (2015−2016) architecture (14 nm), while the Core 2 Duo P9700 uses Penryn (2008−2011) (45 nm). In PassMark, the Celeron N3150 scores 1,177 against the Core 2 Duo P9700's 1,178 — a 0.1% lead for the Core 2 Duo P9700. L3 cache: 0 kB on the Celeron N3150 vs 6 MB L2 Cache on the Core 2 Duo P9700.

Feature	Celeron N3150	Core 2 Duo P9700
Cores / Threads	4 / 4+100%	2 / 2
Boost Clock	2.08 GHz	2.8 GHz+35%
Base Clock	1.6 GHz	2.8 GHz+75%
L3 Cache	0 kB	6 MB L2 Cache
L2 Cache	2 MB	6 MB (total)+200%
Process	14 nm-69%	45 nm
Architecture	Braswell (2015−2016)	Penryn (2008−2011)
PassMark	1,177	1,178

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Celeron N3150 uses the FCBGA1170 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Core 2 Duo P9700 uses PGA478 (PCIe 1.1) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.

Feature	Celeron N3150	Core 2 Duo P9700
Socket	FCBGA1170	PGA478
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0+173%	PCIe 1.1
Max RAM Speed	1600	—
Max RAM Capacity	8	—
RAM Channels	2	—
ECC Support	No	—
PCIe Lanes	4	—

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization: true (Celeron N3150) / not specified (Core 2 Duo P9700). The Celeron N3150 includes integrated graphics (Intel HD Graphics (Braswell)), while the Core 2 Duo P9700 requires a dedicated GPU. Direct competitor: Celeron N3150 rivals AMD E2-7110.