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 T3300 vs Core i3-3229Y 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 T3300 vs Core i3-3229Y: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

Celeron T3300

2010

Why buy it

✅Draws 35W instead of 512W, a 477W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (1,005 vs 1,014).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (1 MB vs 3 MB).
❌Launch MSRP is still $86 MSRP, while Core i3-3229Y mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
❌No integrated graphics, while Core i3-3229Y can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Core i3-3229Y

2013

Why buy it

✅+200% larger total L3 cache (3 MB vs 1 MB).
✅100+% more PCIe lanes (16 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with HD Graphics 4000, while Celeron T3300 needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌1362.9% higher power demand at 512W vs 35W.

Quick Answers

So, is Core i3-3229Y better than Celeron T3300?

Yes. Core i3-3229Y is the better all-around CPU here. It gives you a 1.9% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data, 0.9% 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, Core i3-3229Y is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 1.9% 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 i3-3229Y is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.9% better PassMark, backed by 2 cores and 4 threads. It also has the larger cache pool with 200% larger total L3 cache (3 MB vs 1 MB).

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

Core i3-3229Y is still the much better call for a fresh build. Core i3-3229Y comes in at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus $86 MSRP, and it still gives you a 1.9% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. Celeron T3300 only looks stronger on raw value math because it is extremely cheap, but that usually means used-market pricing on an obsolete 2010 platform. Even with 100.0% better value on paper (11.7 vs 0.0 PassMark/$), it really only makes sense as a cheap stopgap or a niche existing-platform option for someone already on PGA478.

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

Core i3-3229Y makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2013 vs 2010) and 200% larger total L3 cache (3 MB vs 1 MB). That extra compute headroom is more likely to matter as games, background tasks, and creator workloads get heavier.

Celeron T3300 vs Core i3-3229Y Technical Specifications

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

Celeron T3300

The Celeron T3300 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 2007-01-01. Base frequency: 2 GHz. L3 cache: 1 MB. Built on 45 nm process technology. Socket: PGA478. Thermal design power (TDP): 35 Watt. Passmark benchmark score: 1,005 points. Launch price was $69.

Core i3-3229Y

The Core i3-3229Y is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 8 January 2013 (12 years ago). It is based on the Ivy Bridge-Y (2013) architecture. It features 2 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 1.4 GHz, with boost up to 1.4 GHz. L3 cache: 3 MB (total). L2 cache: 256K (per core). Built on 22 nm process technology. Socket: BGA1023. Thermal design power (TDP): 13 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 1,014 points. Launch price was $250.

⚡

Processing Power

The Core i3-3229Y is built on the Ivy Bridge-Y (2013) architecture. In PassMark, the Celeron T3300 scores 1,005 against the Core i3-3229Y's 1,014 — a 0.9% lead for the Core i3-3229Y. L3 cache: 1 MB on the Celeron T3300 vs 3 MB (total) on the Core i3-3229Y.

Feature	Celeron T3300	Core i3-3229Y
Cores / Threads	—	2 / 4
Boost Clock	—	1.4 GHz
Base Clock	2 GHz+43%	1.4 GHz
L3 Cache	1 MB	3 MB (total)+200%
L2 Cache	—	256K (per core)
Process	45 nm	22 nm-51%
Architecture	—	Ivy Bridge-Y (2013)
PassMark	1,005	1,014
Geekbench 6 Single	—	350
Geekbench 6 Multi	—	657

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Celeron T3300 uses the PGA478 socket (PCIe 2.0), while the Core i3-3229Y uses BGA1023 (PCIe 3.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.

Feature	Celeron T3300	Core i3-3229Y
Socket	PGA478	BGA1023
PCIe Generation	PCIe 2.0	PCIe 3.0+50%
Max RAM Speed	—	DDR3L-1600
Max RAM Capacity	—	32 GB
RAM Channels	—	2
ECC Support	—	No
PCIe Lanes	—	16

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization: not specified (Celeron T3300) / VT-x, EPT (Core i3-3229Y). The Core i3-3229Y includes integrated graphics (HD Graphics 4000), while the Celeron T3300 requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Core i3-3229Y targets Budget. Direct competitor: Core i3-3229Y rivals Athlon Silver 3050GE.