Celeron 1007U vs Turion X2 RM-72

Celeron 1007U vs Turion X2 RM-72 Performance Spectrum

Celeron 1007U

2 / 2

1,610

0.0%

1,627

+1.1%

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5945WX

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 1007U vs Turion X2 RM-72 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 Turion X2 RM-72: 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

✅100+% more PCIe lanes (16 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with Intel HD Graphics (Ivy Bridge), while Turion X2 RM-72 needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Turion X2 RM-72 across 31 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (1,610 vs 1,627).
❌1600% higher power demand at 17W vs 1W.

Turion X2 RM-72

2009

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +5.1% higher average FPS across 31 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Draws 1W instead of 17W, a 16W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌No integrated graphics, while Celeron 1007U can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Quick Answers

So, is Turion X2 RM-72 better than Celeron 1007U?

Yes. Turion X2 RM-72 is the better all-around CPU here. It gives you a 5.1% average FPS lead across 31 shared CPU game tests in our data and 1.1% better PassMark, which is enough to make it the stronger overall pick.

Which one is better for gaming?

If gaming is the priority, Turion X2 RM-72 is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 5.1% more average FPS across 31 shared CPU game tests.

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Turion X2 RM-72 is the stronger 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?

Turion X2 RM-72 still makes the most sense overall. Turion X2 RM-72 comes in at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it still gives you a 5.1% average FPS lead across 31 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 2009). That makes it the safer long-term bet.

Celeron 1007U vs Turion X2 RM-72 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.

Turion X2 RM-72

The Turion X2 RM-72 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 2007-01-01. It is based on the Puma (2008−2009) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Max frequency: 2.1 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 1 MB. Built on 65 nm process technology. Socket: S1. Thermal design power (TDP): 1 MB. Passmark benchmark score: 1,627 points. Launch price was $69.

⚡

Processing Power

Both the Celeron 1007U and Turion X2 RM-72 share an identical 2-core/2-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 1.5 GHz on the Celeron 1007U versus 2.1 GHz on the Turion X2 RM-72 — a 33.3% clock advantage for the Turion X2 RM-72. The Celeron 1007U uses the Ivy Bridge (2012−2013) architecture (22 nm), while the Turion X2 RM-72 uses Puma (2008−2009) (65 nm). In PassMark, the Celeron 1007U scores 1,610 against the Turion X2 RM-72's 1,627 — a 1.1% lead for the Turion X2 RM-72. L3 cache: 2 MB (total) on the Celeron 1007U vs 0 kB on the Turion X2 RM-72.

Feature	Celeron 1007U	Turion X2 RM-72
Cores / Threads	2 / 2	2 / 2
Boost Clock	1.5 GHz	2.1 GHz+40%
Base Clock	1.5 GHz	—
L3 Cache	2 MB (total)	0 kB
L2 Cache	256K (per core)+25500%	1 MB
Process	22 nm-66%	65 nm
Architecture	Ivy Bridge (2012−2013)	Puma (2008−2009)
PassMark	1,610	1,627+1%

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Celeron 1007U uses the BGA1023 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Turion X2 RM-72 uses S1 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.