Select any two CPUs for comparison
VS

Gaming Performance Comparison

Recommended System Requirements
Game Celeron 1.83GHz Celeron D 336
Cyberpunk 2077 4229% 2572%
Assassins Creed: Valhalla 5728% 3497%
Call of Duty: Black Ops Cold War 4095% 2489%
FIFA 21 3949% 2399%
Watch Dogs Legion 5728% 3497%
Microsoft Flight Simulator 4804% 2927%
World of Warcraft: Shadowlands 6631% 4054%
Grand Theft Auto VI 7015% 4292%
Godfall 8261% 5060%
Genshin Impact 3178% 1923%

In terms of overall gaming performance, the Intel Celeron D 336 is marginally better than the Intel Celeron 1.83GHz 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 D 336 was released less than a year after the Celeron 1.83GHz, and so they are likely to have similar levels of support, and similarly optimized performance when running the latest games.

Both CPUs exhibit very poor performance, so rather than upgrading from one to the other you should consider looking at more powerful CPUs. Neither of these will be able to run the latest games in any playable way.

The Celeron 1.83GHz and the Celeron D 336 both have 1 cores, and so are quite likely to struggle with the latest games, or at least bottleneck high-end graphics cards when running them. With a decent accompanying GPU, the Celeron 1.83GHz and the Celeron D 336 may still be able to run slightly older games fairly effectively.

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 1.83GHz and the Celeron D 336 are from the same family of CPUs, and thus their clock speeds are directly comparable. With this in mind, it is safe to say that with a 0.97 GHz faster base clock rate, the Celeron D 336 manages to provide significantly better performance than the Celeron 1.83GHz.

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 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 1.83GHz has a 57 Watt lower Maximum TDP than the Celeron D 336. However, the Celeron D 336 was created with a 65 nm smaller manufacturing technology. Overall, by taking both into account, the Celeron 1.83GHz and the Celeron D 336 would appear to produce roughly the same amount of heat, and consume about the same amount of power.

CPU Core Details

CPU Codename--
MoBo SocketSocket 478/Socket NLGA 775/ Socket T
Notebook CPUnono
Release Date30 Nov -000127 Jun 2005
CPU LinkGD LinkGD Link
Approved

CPU Technical Specifications

CPU Cores1vs1
Clock Speed1.83 GHzvs2.8 GHz
Turbo Frequency-vs-
System Bus 667 MHzvs-
Max TDP27 Wvs84 W
Lithography65 nmvs-
Bit Width32 Bitvs-
Voltage Range1.1125-1.25V KBvs-
Max Temperature100°Cvs-
Virtualization Technologyyesvsno
Comparison

CPU Cache and Memory

L1 Cache Size-vs-
L2 Cache Size1 KBvs-
L2 Cache Speed-vs-
L3 Cache Size-vs-
ECC Memory Supportnovsno
Comparison

CPU Graphics

Graphicsno
Base GPU Frequency-vs-
Max GPU Frequency-vs-
DirectX-vs-
Displays Supported-vs-
Comparison

CPU Package and Version Specifications

Package Size35mm x 35mmvs-
Revision-vs-
PCIe Revision-vs-
PCIe Configurations-vs-

Gaming Performance Value

Performance Value

CPU Mini Review

Mini ReviewThe Celeron brand has been used by Intel for several distinct ranges of x86 CPUs targeted at budget personal computers. Celeron processors can run all IA-32 computer programs, but their performance is somewhat lower when compared to similar CPUs with higher-priced Intel CPU brands. For example, the Celeron brand will often have less cache memory, or have advanced features purposely disabled. These missing features have had a variable impact on performance. In some cases, the effect was significant and in other cases the differences were relatively minor. Many of the Celeron designs have achieved a very high bang for the buck, while at other times, the performance difference has been noticeable. This has been the primary justification for the higher cost of other Intel CPU brands versus the Celeron range.Prescott-256 Celeron D processors, initially launched 25 June 2004, featuring double the L1 cache (16 KB) and L2 cache (256 KB) as compared to the previous Willamette and Northwood desktop Celerons, by virtue of being based on the Prescott Pentium 4 core It also features a 533 MT/s bus and SSE3, and a 3xx model number (compared to 5xx for Pentium 4s and 7xx for Pentium Ms). The Prescott-256 Celeron D was manufactured for Socket 478 and LGA 775, with 3x0 and 3x5 designations from 310 through to 355 at clock speeds of 2.13 GHz to 3.33 GHz.