Core 2 Solo SU3500 vs Celeron N2810
Core 2 Solo SU3500
Celeron N2810
Performance Spectrum - CPU
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 SU3500 is positioned at rank 1195 and the Celeron N2810 is on rank 605, so the Celeron N2810 offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar Core 2 Solo SU3500
Performance Per Dollar Celeron N2810
Performance Comparison
About PassMark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
| Insight | Core 2 Solo SU3500 | Celeron N2810 |
|---|---|---|
| Gaming | ❌ Lower gaming performance | ✅ Superior gaming performance |
| Workstation | ❌ Weaker in multi-core tasks | ✅ Better multi-core power |
| Price | ⚠️ Higher cost ($15) | ✅ More affordable ($0) |
| Longevity | 🛑 Legacy (Penryn (2008−2011) / 45 nm) | 🛑 Legacy (Bay Trail-M (2013−2014) / 22 nm) |
💎 Value Proposition
| Insight | Core 2 Solo SU3500 | Celeron N2810 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ❌ Lower cost efficiency | ❌ Lower cost efficiency |
| Upfront Cost | ⚠️ Higher cost ($15) | ✅ More affordable ($0) |
Performance Check
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.
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of Core 2 Solo SU3500 and Celeron N2810
Core 2 Solo SU3500
The Core 2 Solo SU3500 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 1 April 2009 (16 years ago). It is based on the Penryn (2008−2011) architecture. It features 1 cores and 1 threads. Base frequency is 1.3 GHz, with boost up to 1.4 GHz. L3 cache: 3 MB. L2 cache: 3 MB. Built on 45 nm process technology. Socket: BGA956. Thermal design power (TDP): 5.5 Watt. Passmark benchmark score: 1,468 points. Launch price was $262.
Celeron N2810
The Celeron N2810 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 11 September 2013 (12 years ago). It is based on the Bay Trail-M (2013−2014) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 2 GHz, with boost up to 2 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 512K (per core). Built on 22 nm process technology. Socket: FCBGA1170. Thermal design power (TDP): 7.5 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 1,474 points. Launch price was $260.
Processing Power
The Core 2 Solo SU3500 packs 1 cores / 1 threads, while the Celeron N2810 offers 2 cores / 2 threads — the Celeron N2810 has 1 more core. Boost clocks reach 1.4 GHz on the Core 2 Solo SU3500 versus 2 GHz on the Celeron N2810 — a 35.3% clock advantage for the Celeron N2810 (base: 1.3 GHz vs 2 GHz). The Core 2 Solo SU3500 uses the Penryn (2008−2011) architecture (45 nm), while the Celeron N2810 uses Bay Trail-M (2013−2014) (22 nm). In PassMark, the Core 2 Solo SU3500 scores 1,468 against the Celeron N2810's 1,474 — a 0.4% lead for the Celeron N2810. L3 cache: 3 MB on the Core 2 Solo SU3500 vs 0 kB on the Celeron N2810.
| Feature | Core 2 Solo SU3500 | Celeron N2810 |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 1 / 1 | 2 / 2+100% |
| Boost Clock | 1.4 GHz | 2 GHz+43% |
| Base Clock | 1.3 GHz | 2 GHz+54% |
| L3 Cache | 3 MB | 0 kB |
| L2 Cache | 3 MB+500% | 512K (per core) |
| Process | 45 nm | 22 nm-51% |
| Architecture | Penryn (2008−2011) | Bay Trail-M (2013−2014) |
| PassMark | 1,468 | 1,474 |
Memory & Platform
The Core 2 Solo SU3500 uses the BGA956 socket (PCIe 1.1), while the Celeron N2810 uses FCBGA1170 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.
| Feature | Core 2 Solo SU3500 | Celeron N2810 |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | BGA956 | FCBGA1170 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 1.1 | PCIe 2.0+82% |
| Max RAM Speed | — | 1066 |
| Max RAM Capacity | — | 8 |
| RAM Channels | — | 2 |
| ECC Support | — | ❌ |
| PCIe Lanes | — | 4 |
Advanced Features
Virtualization: not specified (Core 2 Solo SU3500) / true (Celeron N2810). The Celeron N2810 includes integrated graphics (Intel HD Graphics (Bay Trail)), while the Core 2 Solo SU3500 requires a dedicated GPU. Direct competitor: Celeron N2810 rivals AMD A4-1250.
| Feature | Core 2 Solo SU3500 | Celeron N2810 |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | — | Yes |
| IGPU Model | — | Intel HD Graphics (Bay Trail) |
| Unlocked | — | No |
| AVX-512 | — | No |
| Virtualization | — | true |
Top Performing CPUs
The most powerful cpus ranked by PassMark CPU Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar CPU comparisons based on Core 2 Solo SU3500 and Celeron N2810
