Core M-5Y31 vs Celeron B800

Core M-5Y31

2 Cores4 Thrd512 WWMax: 2.4 GHz2014

Celeron B800

2 Cores2 Thrd35 WWMax: 1.5 GHz2011

Performance Spectrum - CPU

Core M-5Y31

2 / 4

1,905

0.0%

1,910

+0.3%

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 M-5Y31 is positioned at rank 1166 and the Celeron B800 is on rank 810, so the Celeron B800 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 M-5Y31

#1153

Atom x5-Z8300

MSRP: $20|Avg: N/A

4327%

#1154

Atom Z3735G

MSRP: $17|Avg: N/A

4264%

#1155

Core i5-480M

MSRP: $81|Avg: $77

3914%

#1156

Core i5-460M

MSRP: $80|Avg: $129

3897%

#1157

Core i5-2540M

MSRP: $266|Avg: $10

3861%

#1159

Core i5-450M

MSRP: $32|Avg: $31

3729%

#1160

Core i3-380M

MSRP: $49|Avg: $25

3575%

#1161

Core i5-430M

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $33

3569%

#1162

Core 2 Duo T6600

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $4

3473%

#1165

Core M-5Y10a

MSRP: $281|Avg: $281

100%

#1166

Core M-5Y31

MSRP: $281|Avg: $30

100%

#1167

Core M-5Y10c

MSRP: $281|Avg: $281

100%

#1169

Celeron 1047UE

MSRP: $100|Avg: $100

100%

#1170

Core M-5Y70

MSRP: $281|Avg: $281

99%

#1171

Celeron U3400

MSRP: $86|Avg: $5

99%

#1172

Celeron T1600

MSRP: $107|Avg: $15

99%

#1173

Pro A12-8800B

MSRP: $400|Avg: $40

98%

#1175

Core i7-2637M

MSRP: $289|Avg: N/A

96%

#1176

Athlon PRO 3045B

MSRP: $426|Avg: $180

96%

#1177

Core 2 Duo SL9600

MSRP: $316|Avg: N/A

96%

#1178

Core 2 Duo T5600

MSRP: $241|Avg: N/A

95%

#1179

Pentium N3510

MSRP: $161|Avg: $161

95%

#1180

Core i7-7Y75

MSRP: $393|Avg: $285

95%

Based on actual market prices and performance synthetic scores.

Performance Per Dollar Celeron B800

#798

Atom x5-Z8300

MSRP: $20|Avg: N/A

1229%

#799

Atom Z3735G

MSRP: $17|Avg: N/A

1211%

#800

Core i5-480M

MSRP: $81|Avg: $77

1111%

#801

Core i5-460M

MSRP: $80|Avg: $129

1106%

#802

Core i5-2540M

MSRP: $266|Avg: $10

1096%

#804

Core i5-450M

MSRP: $32|Avg: $31

1059%

#805

Core i3-380M

MSRP: $49|Avg: $25

1015%

#806

Core i5-430M

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $33

1013%

#807

Core 2 Duo T6600

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $4

986%

#810

Celeron B800

MSRP: $80|Avg: $5

100%

#811

Celeron B710

MSRP: $86|Avg: $10

100%

#812

Athlon II Neo K345

MSRP: $50|Avg: $10

100%

#818

Core i7-8709G

MSRP: $338|Avg: $150

98%

#819

Celeron M 560

MSRP: $86|Avg: $10

98%

#824

Celeron Dual-Core T3000

MSRP: $80|Avg: $15

94%

#825

Pentium P6100

MSRP: $100|Avg: $16.39

94%

Based on actual market prices and performance synthetic scores.

Performance Comparison

About PassMark

🏆 Chipversus Verdict

🚀 Performance Leadership

Performance Trade-off: The Core M-5Y31 leads in gaming performance. However, the Celeron B800 is the stronger candidate for professional workloads, offering 0.3% greater multi-core processing power.

Insight	Core M-5Y31	Celeron B800
Gaming	✅ Superior gaming performance	❌ Lower gaming performance
Workstation	❌ Weaker in multi-core tasks	✅ Better multi-core power
Price	⚠️ Higher cost ($30)	✅ More affordable ($5)
Longevity	🛑 Legacy (Broadwell-Y (2014) / 14 nm)	🛑 Legacy (Sandy Bridge (2011−2013) / 32 nm)

💎 Value Proposition

Efficiency: Even within a comparison of older hardware, the Celeron B800 stands out as the superior choice. It is effectively 83% cheaper ($5 vs $30) while identifying as the stronger performer.

Insight	Core M-5Y31	Celeron B800
Cost Efficiency	❌ Lower cost efficiency	✅ Better overall value (+502%)
Upfront Cost	⚠️ Higher cost ($30)	✅ More affordable ($5)

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 M-5Y31 Benchmark Check

Celeron B800 Benchmark Check

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of Core M-5Y31 and Celeron B800

Core M-5Y31

The Core M-5Y31 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 27 October 2014 (11 years ago). It is based on the Broadwell-Y (2014) architecture. It features 2 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 0.9 GHz, with boost up to 2.4 GHz. L3 cache: 4 MB (total). L2 cache: 256K (per core). Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: FCBGA1234. Thermal design power (TDP): 4.5 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 1,905 points. Launch price was $69.

Celeron B800

The Celeron B800 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 19 June 2011 (14 years ago). It is based on the Sandy Bridge (2011−2013) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 1.5 GHz, with boost up to 1.5 GHz. L3 cache: 2 MB (total). L2 cache: 256K (per core). Built on 32 nm process technology. Socket: PGA988. Thermal design power (TDP): 35 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 1,910 points. Launch price was $80.

⚡

Processing Power

The Core M-5Y31 packs 2 cores / 4 threads, matching the Celeron B800's 2 cores. Boost clocks reach 2.4 GHz on the Core M-5Y31 versus 1.5 GHz on the Celeron B800 — a 46.2% clock advantage for the Core M-5Y31 (base: 0.9 GHz vs 1.5 GHz). The Core M-5Y31 uses the Broadwell-Y (2014) architecture (14 nm), while the Celeron B800 uses Sandy Bridge (2011−2013) (32 nm). In PassMark, the Core M-5Y31 scores 1,905 against the Celeron B800's 1,910 — a 0.3% lead for the Celeron B800. L3 cache: 4 MB (total) on the Core M-5Y31 vs 2 MB (total) on the Celeron B800.

Feature	Core M-5Y31	Celeron B800
Cores / Threads	2 / 4	2 / 2
Boost Clock	2.4 GHz+60%	1.5 GHz
Base Clock	0.9 GHz	1.5 GHz+67%
L3 Cache	4 MB (total)+100%	2 MB (total)
L2 Cache	256K (per core)	256K (per core)
Process	14 nm-56%	32 nm
Architecture	Broadwell-Y (2014)	Sandy Bridge (2011−2013)
PassMark	1,905	1,910

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Core M-5Y31 uses the FCBGA1234 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Celeron B800 uses PGA988 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.

Feature	Core M-5Y31	Celeron B800
Socket	FCBGA1234	PGA988
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0+50%	PCIe 2.0
Max RAM Speed	—	DDR3-1333
Max RAM Capacity	—	16 GB
RAM Channels	—	2
ECC Support	—	❌
PCIe Lanes	—	16

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization: not specified (Core M-5Y31) / VT-x (Celeron B800). The Celeron B800 includes integrated graphics (HD Graphics (Sandy Bridge)), while the Core M-5Y31 requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Celeron B800 targets Budget. Direct competitor: Celeron B800 rivals Pentium 967.

Feature	Core M-5Y31	Celeron B800
Integrated GPU	—	Yes
IGPU Model	—	HD Graphics (Sandy Bridge)
Unlocked	—	No
AVX-512	—	No
Virtualization	—	VT-x
Target Use	—	Budget

💰

Value Analysis

The Core M-5Y31 launched at $281 MSRP, while the Celeron B800 debuted at $80. At current prices ($30 vs $5), the Celeron B800 is $25 cheaper. In terms of value (PassMark points per dollar), the Core M-5Y31 delivers 63.5 pts/$ vs 382.0 pts/$ for the Celeron B800 — making the Celeron B800 the 143% better value option.