Atom D2560 vs Celeron E1600

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.

Atom D2560 vs Celeron E1600 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.

Atom D2560 vs Celeron E1600: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

Atom D2560

2012

Why buy it

✅Draws 1W instead of 65W, a 64W reduction.
✅100+% more PCIe lanes (4 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with Intel GMA 3650, while Celeron E1600 needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Celeron E1600 across 37 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (765 vs 815).

Celeron E1600

2009

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +7.4% higher average FPS across 37 shared CPU benchmark tests.

Trade-offs

❌Launch MSRP is still $53 MSRP, while Atom D2560 mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
❌6400% higher power demand at 65W vs 1W.
❌No integrated graphics, while Atom D2560 can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Quick Answers

So, is Celeron E1600 better than Atom D2560?

Yes. Celeron E1600 is the better all-around CPU here. It gives you a 7.4% average FPS lead across 37 shared CPU game tests in our data and 6.5% better PassMark, which is enough to make it the stronger overall pick.

Which one is better for gaming?

If gaming is the priority, Celeron E1600 is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 7.4% more average FPS across 37 shared CPU game tests.

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Celeron E1600 is the stronger fit. You are getting 6.5% better PassMark, backed by 2 cores and 2 threads.

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

Celeron E1600 is the better buy right now. Celeron E1600 comes in at an unclear MSRP at $53 MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it still gives you a 7.4% average FPS lead across 37 shared CPU game tests in our data. It is also 100.0% better value on MSRP (15.4 vs 0.0 PassMark/$), so you are getting the faster CPU without taking a value hit on paper.

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

Atom D2560 makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2012 vs 2009). That makes it the safer long-term bet.

Atom D2560 vs Celeron E1600 Technical Specifications

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

Atom D2560

The Atom D2560 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 24 October 2012 (13 years ago). It is based on the Cedarview (2011−2012) architecture. It features 2 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 2 GHz, with boost up to 2 GHz. L3 cache: 1 MB. L2 cache: 1 MB. Built on 32 nm process technology. Socket: FCBGA559. Thermal design power (TDP): 10 Watt. Memory support: DDR3-800, DDR3-1066. Passmark benchmark score: 765 points. Launch price was $69.

Celeron E1600

The Celeron E1600 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 2007-01-01. It is based on the Allendale (2006−2009) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 2.4 GHz, with boost up to 2.4 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 512 kB (total). Built on 65 nm process technology. Socket: LGA775. Thermal design power (TDP): 65 Watt. Memory support: DDR1, DDR2, DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 815 points. Launch price was $69.

⚡

Processing Power

The Atom D2560 packs 2 cores / 4 threads, matching the Celeron E1600's 2 cores. Boost clocks reach 2 GHz on the Atom D2560 versus 2.4 GHz on the Celeron E1600 — a 18.2% clock advantage for the Celeron E1600 (base: 2 GHz vs 2.4 GHz). The Atom D2560 uses the Cedarview (2011−2012) architecture (32 nm), while the Celeron E1600 uses Allendale (2006−2009) (65 nm). In PassMark, the Atom D2560 scores 765 against the Celeron E1600's 815 — a 6.3% lead for the Celeron E1600. L3 cache: 1 MB on the Atom D2560 vs 0 kB on the Celeron E1600.

Feature	Atom D2560	Celeron E1600
Cores / Threads	2 / 4	2 / 2
Boost Clock	2 GHz	2.4 GHz+20%
Base Clock	2 GHz	2.4 GHz+20%
L3 Cache	1 MB	0 kB
L2 Cache	1 MB+100%	512 kB (total)
Process	32 nm-51%	65 nm
Architecture	Cedarview (2011−2012)	Allendale (2006−2009)
PassMark	765	815+7%
Geekbench 6 Single	—	310
Geekbench 6 Multi	—	560

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Atom D2560 uses the FCBGA559 socket (PCIe 2.0), while the Celeron E1600 uses LGA775 (PCIe 1.1) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR3-1066 on the Atom D2560 versus DDR2-800 on the Celeron E1600 — the Atom D2560 supports 33.3% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The Celeron E1600 supports up to 8 GB of RAM compared to 4 GB — 100% more capacity for professional workloads. Memory channels: 1 (Atom D2560) vs 2 (Celeron E1600). PCIe lanes: 4 (Atom D2560) vs 0 (Celeron E1600) — the Atom D2560 offers 4 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: Intel FCBGA559 (Atom D2560) and G31,P35,G41 (Celeron E1600).

Feature	Atom D2560	Celeron E1600
Socket	FCBGA559	LGA775
PCIe Generation	PCIe 2.0+82%	PCIe 1.1
Max RAM Speed	DDR3-1066+33%	DDR2-800
Max RAM Capacity	4 GB	8 GB+100%
RAM Channels	1	2+100%
ECC Support	No	No
PCIe Lanes	4	0

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization: not specified (Atom D2560) / No (Celeron E1600). The Atom D2560 includes integrated graphics (Intel GMA 3650), while the Celeron E1600 requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Celeron E1600 targets Budget. Direct competitor: Celeron E1600 rivals Pentium E2220.