Celeron 1000M vs E2-9010

Celeron 1000M vs E2-9010 Performance Spectrum

Celeron 1000M

2 / 2

1,070

0.0%

1,073

+0.3%

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3955WX

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7955WX

Ryzen Threadripper 3990X

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.

Celeron 1000M vs E2-9010 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.

Celeron 1000M vs E2-9010: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

Celeron 1000M

2013

Why buy it

✅100+% more PCIe lanes (16 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with Intel HD Graphics (Ivy Bridge), while E2-9010 needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (1,070 vs 1,073).
❌Launch MSRP is still $86 MSRP, while E2-9010 mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
❌51100% higher power demand at 512W vs 1W.

E2-9010

2016

Why buy it

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

Trade-offs

❌No integrated graphics, while Celeron 1000M can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Quick Answers

So, is E2-9010 better than Celeron 1000M?

Yes. E2-9010 is the better all-around CPU here. It gives you a 1.6% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data, 0.3% 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, E2-9010 is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 1.6% 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, E2-9010 is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.3% better PassMark, backed by 2 cores and 2 threads.

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

E2-9010 is still the much better call for a fresh build. E2-9010 comes in at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus $86 MSRP, and it still gives you a 1.6% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. Celeron 1000M only looks stronger on raw value math because it is extremely cheap, but that usually means used-market pricing on an obsolete 2013 platform. Even with 100.0% better value on paper (12.4 vs 0.0 PassMark/$), it really only makes sense as a cheap stopgap or a niche existing-platform option for someone already on PGA988.

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

E2-9010 makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2016 vs 2013) and more multi-core headroom with 2 cores / 2 threads instead of 2/2. That extra compute headroom is more likely to matter as games, background tasks, and creator workloads get heavier.

Celeron 1000M vs E2-9010 Technical Specifications

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

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.

E2-9010

The E2-9010 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 2014-01-01. It is based on the Stoney Ridge (2016−2019) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 2 GHz, with boost up to 2.2 GHz. L2 cache: 2048 kB. Built on 28 nm process technology. Socket: FP4. Thermal design power (TDP): 1 MB. Memory support: DDR4-1866. Passmark benchmark score: 1,073 points. Launch price was $50.

⚡

Processing Power

Both the Celeron 1000M and E2-9010 share an identical 2-core/2-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 1.8 GHz on the Celeron 1000M versus 2.2 GHz on the E2-9010 — a 20% clock advantage for the E2-9010 (base: 1.8 GHz vs 2 GHz). The Celeron 1000M uses the Ivy Bridge (2012−2013) architecture (22 nm), while the E2-9010 uses Stoney Ridge (2016−2019) (28 nm). In PassMark, the Celeron 1000M scores 1,070 against the E2-9010's 1,073 — a 0.3% lead for the E2-9010.

Feature	Celeron 1000M	E2-9010
Cores / Threads	2 / 2	2 / 2
Boost Clock	1.8 GHz	2.2 GHz+22%
Base Clock	1.8 GHz	2 GHz+11%
L3 Cache	2 MB (total)	—
L2 Cache	256K (per core)	2048 kB+700%
Process	22 nm-21%	28 nm
Architecture	Ivy Bridge (2012−2013)	Stoney Ridge (2016−2019)
PassMark	1,070	1,073

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Celeron 1000M uses the PGA988 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the E2-9010 uses FP4 (PCIe 3.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.