Celeron T3500 vs E2-3200

Celeron T3500 vs E2-3200 Performance Spectrum

Celeron T3500

1,055

+0.5%

Core Duo T2050

Celeron N3000

Celeron J1800

Pentium Dual-Core E2180

1,050

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 T3500 vs E2-3200 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 T3500 vs E2-3200: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

Celeron T3500

2010

Why buy it

✅Draws 35W instead of 65W, a 30W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Launch MSRP is still $80 MSRP, while E2-3200 mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.

E2-3200

2011

Why buy it

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (1,050 vs 1,055).
❌85.7% higher power demand at 65W vs 35W.

Quick Answers

So, is Celeron T3500 better than E2-3200?

Yes. Celeron T3500 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 and 0.5% better PassMark, which is enough to make it the stronger overall pick.

Which one is better for gaming?

If gaming is the priority, Celeron T3500 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 T3500 is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.5% better PassMark.

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

Celeron T3500 is the better buy right now. Celeron T3500 comes in at an unclear MSRP at $80 MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it still gives you a 0.1% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. It is also 100.0% better value on MSRP (13.2 vs 0.0 PassMark/$), so you are getting the faster CPU without taking a value hit on paper.

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

E2-3200 makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2011 vs 2010). That makes it the safer long-term bet.

Celeron T3500 vs E2-3200 Technical Specifications

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

Celeron T3500

The Celeron T3500 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 2007-01-01. Base frequency: 2.1 GHz. L3 cache: 1 MB. Built on 45 nm process technology. Socket: PGA478. Thermal design power (TDP): 35 Watt. Passmark benchmark score: 1,055 points. Launch price was $69.

E2-3200

The E2-3200 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 2014-01-01. It is based on the Llano (2011−2012) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 2.4 GHz, with boost up to 2.4 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 512 kB (per core). Built on 32 nm process technology. Socket: FM1. Thermal design power (TDP): 65 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 1,050 points. Launch price was $50.

⚡

Processing Power

The E2-3200 is built on the Llano (2011−2012) architecture. In PassMark, the Celeron T3500 scores 1,055 against the E2-3200's 1,050 — a 0.5% lead for the Celeron T3500. L3 cache: 1 MB on the Celeron T3500 vs 0 kB on the E2-3200.

Feature	Celeron T3500	E2-3200
Cores / Threads	—	2 / 2
Boost Clock	—	2.4 GHz
Base Clock	2.1 GHz	2.4 GHz+14%
L3 Cache	1 MB	0 kB
L2 Cache	—	512 kB (per core)
Process	45 nm	32 nm-29%
Architecture	—	Llano (2011−2012)
PassMark	1,055	1,050

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Celeron T3500 uses the PGA478 socket (PCIe 2.0), while the E2-3200 uses FM1 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.