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.

Head-to-Head Verdict, Benchmarks, Value & Long-Term Outlook

This comparison brings together gaming FPS, productivity performance, platform differences, power efficiency, pricing context, and upgrade path so you can see which CPU actually makes more sense.

Celeron 1000M

2013

Why buy it

✅+1.1% higher PassMark.
✅100+% more PCIe lanes (16 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with Intel HD Graphics (Ivy Bridge), while Celeron Dual-Core T1700 needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌Launch MSRP is still $86 MSRP, while Celeron Dual-Core T1700 mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
❌51100% higher power demand at 512W vs 1W.

Celeron Dual-Core T1700

2008

Why buy it

✅Draws 1W instead of 512W, a 511W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (1,058 vs 1,070).
❌No integrated graphics, while Celeron 1000M can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Celeron 1000M

2013

Celeron Dual-Core T1700

2008

Why buy it

✅+1.1% higher PassMark.
✅100+% more PCIe lanes (16 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with Intel HD Graphics (Ivy Bridge), while Celeron Dual-Core T1700 needs a discrete GPU.

Why buy it

✅Draws 1W instead of 512W, a 511W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Launch MSRP is still $86 MSRP, while Celeron Dual-Core T1700 mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
❌51100% higher power demand at 512W vs 1W.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (1,058 vs 1,070).
❌No integrated graphics, while Celeron 1000M can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Quick Answers

So, is Celeron 1000M better than Celeron Dual-Core T1700?

It depends on what matters more to you. For gaming, Celeron Dual-Core T1700 is ahead with a 2.0% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. For rendering, compiling, streaming, and heavier multitasking, Celeron 1000M pulls ahead with 1.1% better PassMark.

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Celeron 1000M is the better fit. You are getting 1.1% better PassMark, backed by 2 cores and 2 threads.

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

Celeron 1000M is the smarter buy today. Celeron 1000M is at an unclear MSRP at $86 MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it gives you 1.1% better PassMark. The trade-off is that Celeron Dual-Core T1700 is still the better pure gaming CPU with a 2.0% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. It is also 100.0% better value on MSRP (12.4 vs 0.0 PassMark/$), so the better CPU is not just faster, it is also the cleaner value play on paper.

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

Celeron 1000M is the more future-proof choice for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2013 vs 2008) and more multi-core headroom with 2 cores / 2 threads instead of 2/2. That extra compute headroom should age better as games, background tasks, and creator workloads get heavier.

Games Benchmarks

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.

Celeron 1000M Benchmark Check

Celeron Dual-Core T1700 Benchmark Check

Path of Exile 2

Preset	Celeron 1000M	Celeron Dual-Core T1700
1080p
low	27 FPS	26 FPS
medium	27 FPS	26 FPS
high	27 FPS	26 FPS
ultra	27 FPS	26 FPS
1440p
low	27 FPS	26 FPS
medium	27 FPS	26 FPS
high	27 FPS	26 FPS
ultra	27 FPS	26 FPS
4K
low	27 FPS	26 FPS
medium	27 FPS	26 FPS
high	27 FPS	26 FPS
ultra	27 FPS	26 FPS

Open Celeron 1000M Open Celeron Dual-Core T1700

Path of Exile 2

Path of Exile 2

Counter-Strike 2

Preset	Celeron 1000M	Celeron Dual-Core T1700
1080p
low	27 FPS	26 FPS
medium	27 FPS	26 FPS
high	27 FPS	26 FPS
ultra	27 FPS	26 FPS
1440p
low	27 FPS	26 FPS
medium	27 FPS	26 FPS
high	27 FPS	26 FPS
ultra	27 FPS	26 FPS
4K
low	27 FPS	26 FPS
medium	27 FPS	26 FPS
high	27 FPS	26 FPS
ultra	20 FPS	26 FPS

Open Celeron 1000M Open Celeron Dual-Core T1700

Counter-Strike 2

Counter-Strike 2

League of Legends

Preset	Celeron 1000M	Celeron Dual-Core T1700
1080p
low	27 FPS	26 FPS
medium	27 FPS	26 FPS
high	27 FPS	26 FPS
ultra	27 FPS	26 FPS
1440p
low	27 FPS	26 FPS
medium	27 FPS	26 FPS
high	27 FPS	26 FPS
ultra	27 FPS	26 FPS
4K
low	27 FPS	26 FPS
medium	27 FPS	26 FPS
high	27 FPS	26 FPS
ultra	27 FPS	26 FPS

Open Celeron 1000M Open Celeron Dual-Core T1700

League of Legends

League of Legends

Valorant

Preset	Celeron 1000M	Celeron Dual-Core T1700
1080p
low	27 FPS	26 FPS
medium	27 FPS	26 FPS
high	27 FPS	26 FPS
ultra	27 FPS	26 FPS
1440p
low	27 FPS	26 FPS
medium	27 FPS	26 FPS
high	27 FPS	26 FPS
ultra	27 FPS	26 FPS
4K
low	27 FPS	26 FPS
medium	27 FPS	26 FPS
high	27 FPS	26 FPS
ultra	27 FPS	26 FPS

Open Celeron 1000M Open Celeron Dual-Core T1700

Valorant

Valorant

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of Celeron 1000M and Celeron Dual-Core T1700

Celeron 1000M

The Celeron 1000M is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 20 January 2013 (12 years ago). It is based on the Ivy Bridge (2012−2013) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 1.8 GHz, with boost up to 1.8 GHz. L3 cache: 2 MB (total). L2 cache: 256K (per core). Built on 22 nm process technology. Socket: PGA988. Thermal design power (TDP): 35 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 1,070 points. Launch price was $86.

Celeron Dual-Core T1700

The Celeron Dual-Core T1700 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 2007-01-01. It is based on the Merom (2006−2008) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Max frequency: 1.83 GHz. L2 cache: 1 MB. Built on 65 nm process technology. Socket: PGA478. Thermal design power (TDP): 1 MB. Passmark benchmark score: 1,058 points. Launch price was $69.

⚡

Processing Power

Both the Celeron 1000M and Celeron Dual-Core T1700 share an identical 2-core/2-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 1.8 GHz on the Celeron 1000M versus 1.83 GHz on the Celeron Dual-Core T1700 — a 1.7% clock advantage for the Celeron Dual-Core T1700. The Celeron 1000M uses the Ivy Bridge (2012−2013) architecture (22 nm), while the Celeron Dual-Core T1700 uses Merom (2006−2008) (65 nm). In PassMark, the Celeron 1000M scores 1,070 against the Celeron Dual-Core T1700's 1,058 — a 1.1% lead for the Celeron 1000M.

Feature	Celeron 1000M	Celeron Dual-Core T1700
Cores / Threads	2 / 2	2 / 2
Boost Clock	1.8 GHz	1.83 GHz+2%
Base Clock	1.8 GHz	—
L3 Cache	2 MB (total)	—
L2 Cache	256K (per core)	1 MB+300%
Process	22 nm-66%	65 nm
Architecture	Ivy Bridge (2012−2013)	Merom (2006−2008)
PassMark	1,070+1%	1,058

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Celeron 1000M uses the PGA988 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Celeron Dual-Core T1700 uses PGA478 (PCIe 1.1) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR3-1600 on the Celeron 1000M versus DDR2-667 on the Celeron Dual-Core T1700 — the Celeron 1000M supports 40% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The Celeron 1000M supports up to 32 GB of RAM compared to 4 GB — 155.6% more capacity for professional workloads. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. PCIe lanes: 16 (Celeron 1000M) vs 0 (Celeron Dual-Core T1700) — the Celeron 1000M offers 16 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: Intel FCPGA988 (Celeron 1000M) and GL40,GM45 (Celeron Dual-Core T1700).

Feature	Celeron 1000M	Celeron Dual-Core T1700
Socket	PGA988	PGA478
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0+173%	PCIe 1.1
Max RAM Speed	DDR3-1600+50%	DDR2-667
Max RAM Capacity	32 GB+700%	4 GB
RAM Channels	2	2
ECC Support	No	No
PCIe Lanes	16	0

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization: not specified (Celeron 1000M) / No (Celeron Dual-Core T1700). The Celeron 1000M includes integrated graphics (Intel HD Graphics (Ivy Bridge)), while the Celeron Dual-Core T1700 requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Celeron Dual-Core T1700 targets Budget. Direct competitor: Celeron Dual-Core T1700 rivals Pentium T2390.