Select any two CPUs for comparison
VS

Gaming Performance Comparison

Recommended System Requirements
Game Celeron G465 1.9GHz APU E2-3200
Cyberpunk 2077 654% 492%
Assassins Creed: Valhalla 914% 697%
Call of Duty: Black Ops Cold War 630% 474%
Microsoft Flight Simulator 754% 571%
FIFA 21 605% 454%
Immortals: Fenyx Rising 710% 536%
Genshin Impact 471% 348%
Grand Theft Auto VI 1138% 873%
World of Warcraft: Shadowlands 1072% 820%
Watch Dogs Legion 914% 697%

In terms of overall gaming performance, the AMD APU E2-3200 is very slightly better than the Intel Celeron G465 1.9GHz when it comes to running the latest games. This also means it will be less likely to bottleneck more powerful GPUs, allowing them to achieve more of their gaming performance potential.

The Celeron G465 1.9GHz was released less than a year after the APU E2-3200, and so they are likely to have similar levels of support, and similarly optimized performance when running the latest games.

The APU E2-3200 has 1 more core than the Celeron G465 1.9GHz. However, while the APU E2-3200 will probably perform better than the Celeron G465 1.9GHz, both CPUs are likely to struggle with the latest games, and will almost certainly bottleneck high-end graphics cards. Both CPUs also have quite low clock frequencies, which means recent games will have to be played at low settings, assuming you own an equivalently powerful GPU.

More important for gaming than the number of cores and threads is the clock rate. Problematically, unless the two CPUs are from the same family, this can only serve as a general guide and nothing like an exact comparison, because the clock cycles per instruction (CPI) will vary so much.

The Celeron G465 1.9GHz and APU E2-3200 are not from the same family of CPUs, so their clock speeds are by no means directly comparable. Bear in mind, then, that while the APU E2-3200 has a 0.5 GHz faster frequency, this is not always an indicator that it will be superior in performance, despite frequency being crucial when trying to avoid GPU bottlenecking. In this case, however, the difference is enough that it possibly indicates the superiority of the APU E2-3200.

Aside from the clock rate, the next-most important CPU features for PC game performance are L2 and L3 cache size. Faster than RAM, the more cache available, the more data that can be stored for lightning-fast retrieval. L1 Cache is not usually an issue anymore for gaming, with most high-end CPUs eking out about the same L1 performance, and L2 is more important than L3 - but L3 is still important if you want to reach the highest levels of performance. Bear in mind that although it is better to have a larger cache, the larger it is, the higher the latency, so a balance has to be struck.

The APU E2-3200 has a 768 KB bigger L2 cache than the Celeron G465 1.9GHz, and although the APU E2-3200 does not appear to have an L3 cache, its larger L2 cache means that it wins out in this area.

The maximum Thermal Design Power is the power in Watts that the CPU will consume in the worst case scenario. The lithography is the semiconductor manufacturing technology being used to create the CPU - the smaller this is, the more transistors that can be fit into the CPU, and the closer the connections. For both the lithography and the TDP, it is the lower the better, because a lower number means a lower amount of power is necessary to run the CPU, and consequently a lower amount of heat is produced.

The Celeron G465 1.9GHz has a 30 Watt lower Maximum TDP than the APU E2-3200 (though they were created with the same size 32 nm manufacturing technology). What this means is the Celeron G465 1.9GHz will consume significantly less power and consequently produce less heat, enabling more prolonged computational tasks with fewer adverse effects. This will lower your yearly electricity bill significantly, as well as prevent you from having to invest in extra cooling mechanisms (unless you overclock).

The APU E2-3200 has an on-board GPU, which means that it will be capable of running basic graphics applications (i.e., games) without the need for a dedicated graphics card. The Celeron G465 1.9GHz, however, does not, and you will probably have to look for a dedicated card if you wish to use it at all.

For in-depth GPU comparisons with the Radeon HD 6370D, click on the following GPU overview comparison icon (visible throughout Game-Debate), and choose a GPU from the list to compare against:

On-board GPUs tend to be fairly awful in comparison to dedicated cards from the likes of AMD or Nvidia, but as they are built into the CPU, they also tend to be cheaper and require far less power to run (this makes them a good choice for laptops). We would recommend a dedicated card for running the latest games, but integrated GPUs are improving all the time and casual gamers may find less recent games perform perfectly acceptably.

CPU Core Details

CPU CodenameSandy BridgeLlano
MoBo SocketLGA 1155/Socket H2Socket FM1
Notebook CPUnono
Release Date02 Sep 201230 Nov 2011
CPU LinkGD LinkGD Link
Approved

CPU Technical Specifications

CPU Cores1vs2
Clock Speed1.9 GHzvs2.4 GHz
Turbo Frequency-vs-
Max TDP35 Wvs65 W
Lithography32 nmvs32 nm
Bit Width-vs-
Virtualization Technologynovsno
Comparison

CPU Cache and Memory

L1 Cache Size64 KBvs256 KB
L2 Cache Size256 KBvs1024 KB
L2 Cache Speed-vs-
L3 Cache Size1.5 MBvs-
ECC Memory Supportnovsno
Comparison

CPU Graphics

GraphicsRadeon HD 6370D
Base GPU Frequency-vs443 MHz
Max GPU Frequency-vs-
DirectX-vs11
Displays Supported-vs-
Comparison

CPU Package and Version Specifications

Package Size-vs-
Revision-vs-
PCIe Revision-vs-
PCIe Configurations-vs-

Gaming Performance Value

Performance Value

CPU Mini Review

Mini ReviewSandy Bridge is the codename for a microarchitecture developed by Intel beginning in 2005 for central processing units in computers to replace the Nehalem microarchitecture. Intel demonstrated a Sandy Bridge processor in 2009, and released first products based on the architecture in January 2011 under the Core brand.