A10-5700 vs Celeron Dual-Core T1400

CPU

GPU

A10-5700

4 Cores4 Thrd65 WWMax: 4 GHz2012

Similar parts

·······

Buy on Amazon

Celeron Dual-Core T1400

2 Cores2 Thrd512 WWMax: 1.73 GHz2008

Similar parts

·······

Buy on Amazon

A10-5700 vs Celeron Dual-Core T1400 Performance Spectrum

A10-5700

4 / 4

2,747

+0.8%

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7955WX

Ryzen Threadripper 3990X

Celeron Dual-Core T1400

2 / 2

2,725

0.0%

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.

A10-5700 vs Celeron Dual-Core T1400 FPS Benchmarks

Predicted gaming performance across popular games. Tested paired with GeForce RTX 5090 to isolate CPU performance.

Search any supported game below to compare 1080p FPS for both components.

A10-5700 vs Celeron Dual-Core T1400: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

See where each CPU makes more sense in practice: gaming, heavier work, platform cost, power draw, and upgrade path.

A10-5700

2012

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +4.2% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Draws 65W instead of 512W, a 447W reduction.
✅100+% more PCIe lanes (16 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with Radeon HD 7660D, while Celeron Dual-Core T1400 needs a discrete GPU.
✅Includes a boxed cooler (true), unlike Celeron Dual-Core T1400.

Trade-offs

❌Fewer obvious downsides in this matchup outside of normal market pricing swings.

Celeron Dual-Core T1400

2008

Why buy it

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than A10-5700 across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (2,725 vs 2,747).
❌Launch MSRP is still $80 MSRP, while A10-5700 mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
❌687.7% higher power demand at 512W vs 65W.
❌No integrated graphics, while A10-5700 can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Quick Answers

So, is A10-5700 better than Celeron Dual-Core T1400?

Yes. A10-5700 is the better all-around CPU here. It gives you a 4.2% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data, 0.8% better PassMark, and the stronger long-term platform, which is enough to make it the stronger overall pick.

Which one is better for gaming?

If gaming is the priority, A10-5700 is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 4.2% more average FPS across 50 shared CPU game tests.

Which one is better for streaming, content creation, and heavy multitasking?

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, A10-5700 is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.8% better PassMark, backed by 4 cores and 4 threads.

Which one is the smarter buy today, not just the cheaper CPU?

A10-5700 is still the much better call for a fresh build. A10-5700 comes in at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus $80 MSRP, and it still gives you a 4.2% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. Celeron Dual-Core T1400 only looks stronger on raw value math because it is extremely cheap, but that usually means used-market pricing on an obsolete 2008 platform. Even with 100.0% better value on paper (34.1 vs 0.0 PassMark/$), it really only makes sense as a cheap stopgap or a niche existing-platform option for someone already on P.

Which one is more future-proof for 2026 and beyond?

A10-5700 makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2012 vs 2008) and more multi-core headroom with 4 cores / 4 threads instead of 2/2. That extra compute headroom is more likely to matter as games, background tasks, and creator workloads get heavier.

A10-5700 vs Celeron Dual-Core T1400 Technical Specifications

Side-by-side specs, architecture details, clocks, memory, power, and platform differences.

A10-5700

The A10-5700 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 2014-01-01. It is based on the Trinity (2012−2013) architecture. It features 4 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 3.4 GHz, with boost up to 4 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 1 MB (per core). Built on 32 nm process technology. Socket: FM2. Thermal design power (TDP): 65 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 2,747 points. Launch price was $130.

Celeron Dual-Core T1400

The Celeron Dual-Core T1400 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 2007-01-01. It is based on the Merom-2M (2008) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Max frequency: 1.73 GHz. L2 cache: 512 kB. Built on 65 nm process technology. Socket: P. Thermal design power (TDP): 512 kB. Passmark benchmark score: 2,725 points. Launch price was $69.

⚡

Processing Power

The A10-5700 packs 4 cores / 4 threads, while the Celeron Dual-Core T1400 offers 2 cores / 2 threads — the A10-5700 has 2 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4 GHz on the A10-5700 versus 1.73 GHz on the Celeron Dual-Core T1400 — a 79.2% clock advantage for the A10-5700. The A10-5700 uses the Trinity (2012−2013) architecture (32 nm), while the Celeron Dual-Core T1400 uses Merom-2M (2008) (65 nm). In PassMark, the A10-5700 scores 2,747 against the Celeron Dual-Core T1400's 2,725 — a 0.8% lead for the A10-5700.

Feature	A10-5700	Celeron Dual-Core T1400
Cores / Threads	4 / 4+100%	2 / 2
Boost Clock	4 GHz+131%	1.73 GHz
Base Clock	3.4 GHz	—
L3 Cache	0 kB	—
L2 Cache	1 MB (per core)+100%	512 kB
Process	32 nm-51%	65 nm
Architecture	Trinity (2012−2013)	Merom-2M (2008)
PassMark	2,747	2,725

🧠

Memory & Platform

The A10-5700 uses the FM2 socket (PCIe 2.0), while the Celeron Dual-Core T1400 uses P (PCIe 1.1) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches 1866 on the A10-5700 versus DDR2-667 on the Celeron Dual-Core T1400 — the A10-5700 supports 179.8% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The A10-5700 supports up to 64 GB of RAM compared to 4 GB — 1500% more capacity for professional workloads. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. PCIe lanes: 16 (A10-5700) vs 0 (Celeron Dual-Core T1400) — the A10-5700 offers 16 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: A55,A75,A85X (A10-5700) and GM965,GL960 (Celeron Dual-Core T1400).

Feature	A10-5700	Celeron Dual-Core T1400
Socket	FM2	P
PCIe Generation	PCIe 2.0+82%	PCIe 1.1
Max RAM Speed	1866+180%	DDR2-667
Max RAM Capacity	64 GB+1500%	4 GB
RAM Channels	2	2
ECC Support	No	No
PCIe Lanes	16	0

🔧

Advanced Features

Neither processor supports overclocking. Virtualization support: true (A10-5700) vs No (Celeron Dual-Core T1400). The A10-5700 includes integrated graphics (Radeon HD 7660D), while the Celeron Dual-Core T1400 requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Celeron Dual-Core T1400 targets Budget. Direct competitor: A10-5700 rivals Core i3-3220; Celeron Dual-Core T1400 rivals Pentium T2370.