Core 2 Solo SU3300 vs Celeron 3765U

Core 2 Solo SU3300

1 Cores1 Thrd3 WWMax: 1.2 GHz2008

Celeron 3765U

2 Cores2 Thrd512 WWMax: 1.9 GHz2015

Performance Spectrum - CPU

Core 2 Solo SU3300

1 / 1

1,247

0.0%

1,252

+0.4%

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.

Value Upgrade Path

This is the official ChipVERSUS Value Rating, comparing raw performance (PassMark) per dollar. Components placed above yours deliver better value for money. The Core 2 Solo SU3300 is positioned at rank 1211 and the Celeron 3765U is on rank 445, so the Celeron 3765U offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.

MSRP is the manufacturer's suggested retail price.•
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.

Performance Per Dollar Core 2 Solo SU3300

#1199

Atom x5-Z8300

MSRP: $20|Avg: N/A

6164%

#1200

Atom Z3735G

MSRP: $17|Avg: N/A

6074%

#1201

Core i5-480M

MSRP: $81|Avg: $77

5576%

#1202

Core i5-460M

MSRP: $80|Avg: $129

5550%

#1203

Core i5-2540M

MSRP: $266|Avg: $10

5500%

#1205

Core i5-450M

MSRP: $32|Avg: $31

5311%

#1206

Core i3-380M

MSRP: $49|Avg: $25

5092%

#1207

Core i5-430M

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $33

5084%

#1208

Core 2 Duo T6600

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $4

4947%

#1211

Core 2 Solo SU3300

MSRP: $262|Avg: $50

100%

#1212

Celeron 540

MSRP: $86|Avg: $5

100%

#1213

Celeron U3600

MSRP: $134|Avg: $134

98%

#1216

Core 2 Quad Q9000

MSRP: $348|Avg: $15

96%

#1217

Core i5-2537M

MSRP: $250|Avg: N/A

96%

#1218

Core i7-720QM

MSRP: $364|Avg: N/A

96%

#1219

Pentium U5400

MSRP: $289|Avg: $214

93%

#1220

Pentium T2330

MSRP: $150|Avg: $7

93%

#1221

Z-01

MSRP: $50|Avg: $10

90%

#1222

Pentium T2310

MSRP: $150|Avg: $14

88%

#1223

Celeron SU2300

MSRP: $134|Avg: $134

86%

#1224

Core i5-560UM

MSRP: $250|Avg: N/A

85%

#1225

Core i7-660UM

MSRP: $317|Avg: N/A

85%

#1226

C-30

MSRP: $50|Avg: $15

84%

Based on actual market prices and performance synthetic scores.

Performance Per Dollar Celeron 3765U

#433

Atom x5-Z8300

MSRP: $20|Avg: N/A

586%

#434

Atom Z3735G

MSRP: $17|Avg: N/A

577%

#435

Core i5-480M

MSRP: $81|Avg: $77

530%

#436

Core i5-460M

MSRP: $80|Avg: $129

528%

#437

Core i5-2540M

MSRP: $266|Avg: $10

523%

#439

Core i5-450M

MSRP: $32|Avg: $31

505%

#440

Core i3-380M

MSRP: $49|Avg: $25

484%

#441

Core i5-430M

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $33

483%

#442

Core 2 Duo T6600

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $4

470%

#445

Celeron 3765U

MSRP: N/A|Avg: N/A

100%

Based on actual market prices and performance synthetic scores.

Performance Comparison

About PassMark

🏆 Chipversus Verdict

🚀 Performance Leadership

Generational Difference: This comparison involves processors from different technological eras. The Celeron 3765U (2015) utilizes 14 nm technology and DDR3, providing a fundamental performance advantage.

Insight	Core 2 Solo SU3300	Celeron 3765U
Gaming	❌ Lower gaming performance	✅ Superior gaming performance
Workstation	❌ Weaker in multi-core tasks	✅ Better multi-core power
Price	⚠️ Higher cost ($50)	✅ More affordable ($0)
Longevity	🛑 Legacy (Penryn (2008−2011) / 45 nm)	🛑 Legacy (Broadwell (2015−2019) / 14 nm)

💎 Value Proposition

The Core 2 Solo SU3300 (2008) relies on 45 nm technology and older memory, placing it in a different performance category relative to modern standards.

Insight	Core 2 Solo SU3300	Celeron 3765U
Cost Efficiency	❌ Lower cost efficiency	❌ Lower cost efficiency
Upfront Cost	⚠️ Higher cost ($50)	✅ More affordable ($0)

Performance Check

Paired with RTX 4090

To accurately isolate CPU performance, all benchmarks below use an NVIDIA RTX 4090 as the reference GPU. This eliminates GPU-side bottlenecks and highlights pure processing throughput differences between the CPUs.

Note: Real-world results may vary based on your actual GPU. CPU performance impact is more visible in processing-intensive titles and high-refresh-rate gaming scenarios.

Core 2 Solo SU3300 Benchmark Check

Celeron 3765U Benchmark Check

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of Core 2 Solo SU3300 and Celeron 3765U

Core 2 Solo SU3300

The Core 2 Solo SU3300 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 20 August 2008 (17 years ago). It is based on the Penryn (2008−2011) architecture. It features 1 cores and 1 threads. Max frequency: 1.2 GHz. L2 cache: 3 MB. Built on 45 nm process technology. Socket: BGA956. Thermal design power (TDP): 3 MB. Passmark benchmark score: 1,247 points. Launch price was $262.

Celeron 3765U

The Celeron 3765U is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 1 June 2015 (10 years ago). It is based on the Broadwell (2015−2019) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 1.9 GHz, with boost up to 1.9 GHz. L3 cache: 2 MB. L2 cache: 512 kB. Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: FCBGA1168. Thermal design power (TDP): 15 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 1,252 points. Launch price was $107.

⚡

Processing Power

The Core 2 Solo SU3300 packs 1 cores / 1 threads, while the Celeron 3765U offers 2 cores / 2 threads — the Celeron 3765U has 1 more core. Boost clocks reach 1.2 GHz on the Core 2 Solo SU3300 versus 1.9 GHz on the Celeron 3765U — a 45.2% clock advantage for the Celeron 3765U. The Core 2 Solo SU3300 uses the Penryn (2008−2011) architecture (45 nm), while the Celeron 3765U uses Broadwell (2015−2019) (14 nm). In PassMark, the Core 2 Solo SU3300 scores 1,247 against the Celeron 3765U's 1,252 — a 0.4% lead for the Celeron 3765U.

Feature	Core 2 Solo SU3300	Celeron 3765U
Cores / Threads	1 / 1	2 / 2+100%
Boost Clock	1.2 GHz	1.9 GHz+58%
Base Clock	—	1.9 GHz
L3 Cache	—	2 MB
L2 Cache	3 MB+500%	512 kB
Process	45 nm	14 nm-69%
Architecture	Penryn (2008−2011)	Broadwell (2015−2019)
PassMark	1,247	1,252

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Core 2 Solo SU3300 uses the BGA956 socket (PCIe 1.1), while the Celeron 3765U uses FCBGA1168 (PCIe 3.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR2-800 on the Core 2 Solo SU3300 versus DDR3L-1600 on the Celeron 3765U — the Celeron 3765U supports 40% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The Celeron 3765U supports up to 16 GB of RAM compared to 4 GB — 120% more capacity for professional workloads. Memory channels: 1 (Core 2 Solo SU3300) vs 2 (Celeron 3765U). PCIe lanes: 0 (Core 2 Solo SU3300) vs 12 (Celeron 3765U) — the Celeron 3765U offers 12 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives.

Feature	Core 2 Solo SU3300	Celeron 3765U
Socket	BGA956	FCBGA1168
PCIe Generation	PCIe 1.1	PCIe 3.0+173%
Max RAM Speed	DDR2-800	DDR3L-1600+50%
Max RAM Capacity	4 GB	16 GB+300%
RAM Channels	1	2+100%
ECC Support	❌	❌
PCIe Lanes	0	12

🔧

Advanced Features

Neither processor supports overclocking. Virtualization support: VT-x (Core 2 Solo SU3300) vs VT-x, VT-d (Celeron 3765U). The Celeron 3765U includes integrated graphics (HD Graphics (Broadwell)), while the Core 2 Solo SU3300 requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Core 2 Solo SU3300 targets Mobile, Celeron 3765U targets Budget. Direct competitor: Celeron 3765U rivals Pentium 3825U.