Celeron N3350 vs E2-1800

Celeron N3350 vs E2-1800 Performance Spectrum

Celeron N3350

2 / 2

1,112

+0.2%

Pentium D 830

Pentium T2370

Pentium T3400

Pentium Dual-Core E2200

1,110

0.0%

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 N3350 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 N3350 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 N3350

2016

Why buy it

✅Draws 6W instead of 18W, a 12W reduction.
✅100+% more PCIe lanes (6 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with Intel HD Graphics 500, while E2-1800 needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌Launch MSRP is still $107 MSRP, while E2-1800 mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.

E2-1800

2012

Why buy it

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (1,110 vs 1,112).
❌200% higher power demand at 18W vs 6W.
❌No integrated graphics, while Celeron N3350 can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Quick Answers

So, is Celeron N3350 better than E2-1800?

Yes. Celeron N3350 is the better all-around CPU here. It gives you a 0.1% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data, 0.2% better PassMark, and the stronger long-term platform, which is enough to make it the stronger overall pick.

Which one is better for gaming?

If gaming is the priority, Celeron N3350 is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 0.1% 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 N3350 is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.2% better PassMark, backed by 2 cores and 2 threads.

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

Celeron N3350 is the better buy right now. Celeron N3350 comes in at an unclear MSRP at $107 MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it still gives you a 0.1% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. It is also 100.0% better value on MSRP (10.4 vs 0.0 PassMark/$), so you are getting the faster CPU without taking a value hit on paper.

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

Celeron N3350 makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2016 vs 2012) and more multi-core headroom with 2 cores / 2 threads instead of 2/2. That extra compute headroom is more likely to matter as games, background tasks, and creator workloads get heavier.

Celeron N3350 vs E2-1800 Technical Specifications

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

Celeron N3350

The Celeron N3350 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 30 August 2016 (9 years ago). It is based on the Apollo Lake (2014−2016) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 1.1 GHz, with boost up to 2.4 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 1 MB. Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: FCBGA1296. Thermal design power (TDP): 6 Watt. Memory support: DDR3, DDR4. Passmark benchmark score: 1,112 points. Launch price was $24.

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 N3350 and E2-1800 share an identical 2-core/2-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 2.4 GHz on the Celeron N3350 versus 1.7 GHz on the E2-1800 — a 34.1% clock advantage for the Celeron N3350. The Celeron N3350 uses the Apollo Lake (2014−2016) architecture (14 nm), while the E2-1800 uses Zacate (2011−2013) (40 nm). In PassMark, the Celeron N3350 scores 1,112 against the E2-1800's 1,110 — a 0.2% lead for the Celeron N3350. Both processors carry 0 kB of L3 cache.

Feature	Celeron N3350	E2-1800
Cores / Threads	2 / 2	2 / 2
Boost Clock	2.4 GHz+41%	1.7 GHz
Base Clock	1.1 GHz	—
L3 Cache	0 kB	0 kB
L2 Cache	1 MB	512K (per core)+51100%
Process	14 nm-65%	40 nm
Architecture	Apollo Lake (2014−2016)	Zacate (2011−2013)
PassMark	1,112	1,110
Geekbench 6 Single	250	—
Geekbench 6 Multi	450	—

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Celeron N3350 uses the FCBGA1296 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the E2-1800 uses FT1 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.

Feature	Celeron N3350	E2-1800
Socket	FCBGA1296	FT1
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0+50%	PCIe 2.0
Max RAM Speed	LPDDR4-2400	—
Max RAM Capacity	8 GB	—
RAM Channels	2	—
ECC Support	No	—
PCIe Lanes	6	—

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization: VT-x, VT-d, EPT (Celeron N3350) / not specified (E2-1800). The Celeron N3350 includes integrated graphics (Intel HD Graphics 500), while the E2-1800 requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Celeron N3350 targets Entry Level Laptop/NUC. Direct competitor: Celeron N3350 rivals AMD A4-9120.