
Celeron 1005M

Core 2 Duo E6320
Celeron 1005M vs Core 2 Duo E6320 Performance Spectrum
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 1005M vs Core 2 Duo E6320 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.

Path of Exile 2

Counter-Strike 2

League of Legends

Valorant

Among Us

Apex Legends

ARC Raiders

Baldur's Gate 3

Call of Duty: Black Ops 6
Celeron 1005M vs Core 2 Duo E6320: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict
See where each CPU makes more sense in practice: gaming, heavier work, platform cost, power draw, and upgrade path.
Celeron 1005M
2013Why buy it
- ✅Costs $77 less on MSRP ($86 MSRP vs $163 MSRP).
- ✅Delivers 89.7% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 13.0 vs 6.8 PassMark/$ ($86 MSRP vs $163 MSRP).
- ✅Integrated graphics onboard with Intel HD Graphics (Ivy Bridge), while Core 2 Duo E6320 needs a discrete GPU.
Trade-offs
- ❌687.7% higher power demand at 512W vs 65W.
- ❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Core 2 Duo E6320.
Core 2 Duo E6320
2007Why buy it
- ✅Draws 65W instead of 512W, a 447W reduction.
- ✅Includes a boxed cooler (true), unlike Celeron 1005M.
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower PassMark (1,115 vs 1,116).
- ❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 6.8 vs 13.0 PassMark/$ ($163 MSRP vs $86 MSRP).
- ❌No integrated graphics, while Celeron 1005M can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.
Quick Answers
So, is Celeron 1005M better than Core 2 Duo E6320?
Which one is better for gaming?
Which one is better for streaming, content creation, and heavy multitasking?
Which one is the smarter buy today, not just the cheaper CPU?
Which one is more future-proof for 2026 and beyond?
Celeron 1005M vs Core 2 Duo E6320 Technical Specifications
Side-by-side specs, architecture details, clocks, memory, power, and platform differences.

Celeron 1005M
The Celeron 1005M is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 1 July 2013 (12 years ago). It is based on the Ivy Bridge (2012−2013) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 1.9 GHz, with boost up to 1.9 GHz. L3 cache: 2 MB. L2 cache: 512 kB. Built on 22 nm process technology. Socket: PGA988. Thermal design power (TDP): 35 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 1,116 points. Launch price was $86.

Core 2 Duo E6320
The Core 2 Duo E6320 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 2008-01-01. It is based on the Conroe (2006−2007) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 1.86 GHz, with boost up to 1.86 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 4 MB. Built on 65 nm process technology. Socket: LGA775. Thermal design power (TDP): 65 Watt. Memory support: DDR1, DDR2, DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 1,115 points. Launch price was $249.
Processing Power
Both the Celeron 1005M and Core 2 Duo E6320 share an identical 2-core/2-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 1.9 GHz on the Celeron 1005M versus 1.86 GHz on the Core 2 Duo E6320 — a 2.1% clock advantage for the Celeron 1005M (base: 1.9 GHz vs 1.86 GHz). The Celeron 1005M uses the Ivy Bridge (2012−2013) architecture (22 nm), while the Core 2 Duo E6320 uses Conroe (2006−2007) (65 nm). In PassMark, the Celeron 1005M scores 1,116 against the Core 2 Duo E6320's 1,115 — a 0.1% lead for the Celeron 1005M. L3 cache: 2 MB on the Celeron 1005M vs 0 kB on the Core 2 Duo E6320.
| Feature | Celeron 1005M | Core 2 Duo E6320 |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 2 / 2 | 2 / 2 |
| Boost Clock | 1.9 GHz+2% | 1.86 GHz |
| Base Clock | 1.9 GHz+2% | 1.86 GHz |
| L3 Cache | 2 MB | 0 kB |
| L2 Cache | 512 kB | 4 MB+700% |
| Process | 22 nm-66% | 65 nm |
| Architecture | Ivy Bridge (2012−2013) | Conroe (2006−2007) |
| PassMark | 1,116 | 1,115 |
| Cinebench R23 Multi | 656 | — |
| Geekbench 6 Single | 350 | — |
| Geekbench 6 Multi | 607 | — |
Memory & Platform
The Celeron 1005M uses the PGA988 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Core 2 Duo E6320 uses LGA775 (PCIe 1.1) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR3-1600 on the Celeron 1005M versus 1066 on the Core 2 Duo E6320 — the Celeron 1005M supports 50.1% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The Celeron 1005M supports up to 32 GB of RAM compared to 16 GB — 100% more capacity for professional workloads. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. Both provide 16 PCIe lanes. Chipset compatibility: HM76,HM77 (Celeron 1005M) and P35,G31,G33,P45 (Core 2 Duo E6320).
| Feature | Celeron 1005M | Core 2 Duo E6320 |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | PGA988 | LGA775 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 3.0+173% | PCIe 1.1 |
| Max RAM Speed | DDR3-1600+50% | 1066 |
| Max RAM Capacity | 32 GB+100% | 16 GB |
| RAM Channels | 2 | 2 |
| ECC Support | No | No |
| PCIe Lanes | 16 | 16 |
Advanced Features
Neither processor supports overclocking. Virtualization support: VT-x, VT-d (Celeron 1005M) vs true (Core 2 Duo E6320). The Celeron 1005M includes integrated graphics (Intel HD Graphics (Ivy Bridge)), while the Core 2 Duo E6320 requires a dedicated GPU. Direct competitor: Core 2 Duo E6320 rivals Athlon 64 X2 4200+.
| Feature | Celeron 1005M | Core 2 Duo E6320 |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | Yes | No |
| IGPU Model | Intel HD Graphics (Ivy Bridge) | None |
| Unlocked | No | No |
| AVX-512 | No | No |
| Virtualization | VT-x, VT-d | true |
Value Analysis
At launch, the Celeron 1005M was priced at $86, while the Core 2 Duo E6320 came in at $163. On launch pricing ($86 vs $163), Celeron 1005M was $77 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Celeron 1005M delivers 13.0 pts/$ vs 6.8 pts/$ for the Core 2 Duo E6320 — making the Celeron 1005M the 61.9% better value option.
| Feature | Celeron 1005M | Core 2 Duo E6320 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $86-47% | $163 |
| Performance per Dollar | 13.0+91% | 6.8 |
| Release Date | 2013 | 2007 |
Affiliate Disclosure
ChipVERSUS is a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to Amazon.com. We may earn a commission on qualifying purchases made through our links. This comes at no additional cost to you and helps support our work in providing comprehensive PC building guides and tools.
Amazon and the Amazon logo are trademarks of Amazon.com, Inc. or its affiliates.
Top Performing CPUs
The most powerful cpus ranked by PassMark CPU Mark benchmark scores.














