Celeron N5100 vs FX-9830P

Celeron N5100 vs FX-9830P Performance Spectrum

Celeron N5100

4 / 4

3,305

+0.2%

3,298

0.0%

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 N5100 vs FX-9830P 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 N5100 vs FX-9830P: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

Celeron N5100

2021

Why buy it

✅+0.2% higher PassMark.
✅Draws 6W instead of 35W, a 29W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than FX-9830P across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.

FX-9830P

2016

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +6.0% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (3,298 vs 3,305).
❌Launch MSRP is still $150 MSRP, while Celeron N5100 mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
❌483.3% higher power demand at 35W vs 6W.

Quick Answers

So, is Celeron N5100 better than FX-9830P?

It depends on what you want from the system. For gaming, FX-9830P is ahead with a 6.0% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. For rendering, compiling, streaming, and heavier multitasking, Celeron N5100 pulls ahead with 0.2% better PassMark.

Which one is better for streaming, content creation, and heavy multitasking?

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Celeron N5100 is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.2% better PassMark, backed by 4 cores and 4 threads.

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

Celeron N5100 is the easy recommendation for a fresh desktop build. Celeron N5100 comes in at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus $150 MSRP, and it still gives you 0.2% better PassMark. FX-9830P 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.

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

Celeron N5100 makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2021 vs 2016) and more multi-core headroom with 4 cores / 4 threads instead of 4/4. That extra compute headroom is more likely to matter as games, background tasks, and creator workloads get heavier.

Celeron N5100 vs FX-9830P Technical Specifications

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

Celeron N5100

The Celeron N5100 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 2007-01-01. It is based on the Jasper Lake (2021) architecture. It features 4 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 1.1 GHz, with boost up to 2.8 GHz. L3 cache: 4 MB (total). L2 cache: 1.5 MB (total). Built on 10 nm process technology. Socket: BGA1338. Thermal design power (TDP): 6 Watt. Memory support: DDR4. Passmark benchmark score: 3,305 points. Launch price was $69.

FX-9830P

The FX-9830P is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 31 May 2016 (9 years ago). It is based on the Bristol Ridge (2016−2019) architecture. It features 4 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 3 GHz, with boost up to 3.7 GHz. L2 cache: 1 MB (per module). Built on 28 nm process technology. Socket: FP4. Thermal design power (TDP): 35 Watt. Memory support: DDR3, DDR4. Passmark benchmark score: 3,298 points. Launch price was $69.

⚡

Processing Power

Both the Celeron N5100 and FX-9830P share an identical 4-core/4-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 2.8 GHz on the Celeron N5100 versus 3.7 GHz on the FX-9830P — a 27.7% clock advantage for the FX-9830P (base: 1.1 GHz vs 3 GHz). The Celeron N5100 uses the Jasper Lake (2021) architecture (10 nm), while the FX-9830P uses Bristol Ridge (2016−2019) (28 nm). In PassMark, the Celeron N5100 scores 3,305 against the FX-9830P's 3,298 — a 0.2% lead for the Celeron N5100.

Feature	Celeron N5100	FX-9830P
Cores / Threads	4 / 4	4 / 4
Boost Clock	2.8 GHz	3.7 GHz+32%
Base Clock	1.1 GHz	3 GHz+173%
L3 Cache	4 MB (total)	—
L2 Cache	1.5 MB (total)+50%	1 MB (per module)
Process	10 nm-64%	28 nm
Architecture	Jasper Lake (2021)	Bristol Ridge (2016−2019)
PassMark	3,305	3,298

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Celeron N5100 uses the BGA1338 socket (PCIe 4.0), while the FX-9830P uses FP4 (PCIe 3.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.