Celeron 1007U vs Celeron Dual-Core T1500

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 1007U vs Celeron Dual-Core T1500 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 1007U vs Celeron Dual-Core T1500: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

Celeron 1007U

2013

Why buy it

✅Draws 17W instead of 512W, a 495W reduction.
✅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 T1500 needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Celeron Dual-Core T1500 across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (1,610 vs 1,625).

Celeron Dual-Core T1500

2008

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +4.0% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.

Trade-offs

❌2911.8% higher power demand at 512W vs 17W.
❌No integrated graphics, while Celeron 1007U can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Quick Answers

So, is Celeron Dual-Core T1500 better than Celeron 1007U?

Yes. Celeron Dual-Core T1500 is the better all-around CPU here. It gives you a 4.0% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data and 0.9% better PassMark, which is enough to make it the stronger overall pick.

Which one is better for gaming?

If gaming is the priority, Celeron Dual-Core T1500 is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 4.0% 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, Celeron Dual-Core T1500 is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.9% better PassMark, backed by 2 cores and 2 threads.

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

Celeron Dual-Core T1500 still makes the most sense overall. Celeron Dual-Core T1500 comes in at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it still gives you a 4.0% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data.

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

Celeron 1007U makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2013 vs 2008). That makes it the safer long-term bet.

Celeron 1007U vs Celeron Dual-Core T1500 Technical Specifications

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

Celeron 1007U

The Celeron 1007U 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 1.5 GHz, with boost up to 1.5 GHz. L3 cache: 2 MB (total). L2 cache: 256K (per core). Built on 22 nm process technology. Socket: BGA1023. Thermal design power (TDP): 17 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 1,610 points. Launch price was $86.

Celeron Dual-Core T1500

The Celeron Dual-Core T1500 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: 1.87 GHz. L2 cache: 512 kB. Built on 65 nm process technology. Thermal design power (TDP): 512 kB. Passmark benchmark score: 1,625 points. Launch price was $69.

⚡

Processing Power

Both the Celeron 1007U and Celeron Dual-Core T1500 share an identical 2-core/2-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 1.5 GHz on the Celeron 1007U versus 1.87 GHz on the Celeron Dual-Core T1500 — a 22% clock advantage for the Celeron Dual-Core T1500. The Celeron 1007U uses the Ivy Bridge (2012−2013) architecture (22 nm), while the Celeron Dual-Core T1500 uses Merom (2006−2008) (65 nm). In PassMark, the Celeron 1007U scores 1,610 against the Celeron Dual-Core T1500's 1,625 — a 0.9% lead for the Celeron Dual-Core T1500.

Feature	Celeron 1007U	Celeron Dual-Core T1500
Cores / Threads	2 / 2	2 / 2
Boost Clock	1.5 GHz	1.87 GHz+25%
Base Clock	1.5 GHz	—
L3 Cache	2 MB (total)	—
L2 Cache	256K (per core)	512 kB+100%
Process	22 nm-66%	65 nm
Architecture	Ivy Bridge (2012−2013)	Merom (2006−2008)
PassMark	1,610	1,625

🧠

Memory & Platform

Maximum memory speed reaches DDR3-1600 on the Celeron 1007U versus DDR2-667 on the Celeron Dual-Core T1500 — the Celeron 1007U supports 139.9% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The Celeron 1007U supports up to 32 GB of RAM compared to 4 GB — 700% more capacity for professional workloads. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. PCIe lanes: 16 (Celeron 1007U) vs 0 (Celeron Dual-Core T1500) — the Celeron 1007U offers 16 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: Intel FCBGA1023 (Celeron 1007U) and GM965,GL960 (Celeron Dual-Core T1500).

Feature	Celeron 1007U	Celeron Dual-Core T1500
Socket	BGA1023	—
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0+173%	PCIe 1.1
Max RAM Speed	DDR3-1600+140%	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 1007U) / No (Celeron Dual-Core T1500). The Celeron 1007U includes integrated graphics (Intel HD Graphics (Ivy Bridge)), while the Celeron Dual-Core T1500 requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Celeron Dual-Core T1500 targets Budget. Direct competitor: Celeron Dual-Core T1500 rivals Pentium T2390.