Celeron 1020E vs Core i5-2467M

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 1020E vs Core i5-2467M 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 1020E vs Core i5-2467M: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

Celeron 1020E

2013

Why buy it

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (1,406 vs 1,410).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (2 MB vs 3 MB).
❌Launch MSRP is still $86 MSRP, while Core i5-2467M mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
❌2911.8% higher power demand at 512W vs 17W.

Core i5-2467M

2011

Why buy it

✅+50% larger total L3 cache (3 MB vs 2 MB).
✅Draws 17W instead of 512W, a 495W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Fewer obvious downsides in this matchup outside of normal market pricing swings.

Quick Answers

So, is Core i5-2467M better than Celeron 1020E?

Yes. Core i5-2467M is the better all-around CPU here. It gives you a 0.1% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data and 0.3% better PassMark, which is enough to make it the stronger overall pick.

Which one is better for gaming?

If gaming is the priority, Core i5-2467M is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 0.1% 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, Core i5-2467M is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.3% better PassMark, backed by 2 cores and 4 threads. It also has the larger cache pool with 50% larger total L3 cache (3 MB vs 2 MB).

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

Core i5-2467M is still the much better call for a fresh build. Core i5-2467M comes in at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus $86 MSRP, and it still gives you a 0.1% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. Celeron 1020E only looks stronger on raw value math because it is extremely cheap, but that usually means used-market pricing on an obsolete 2013 platform. Even with 100.0% better value on paper (16.3 vs 0.0 PassMark/$), it really only makes sense as a cheap stopgap or a niche existing-platform option for someone already on G2.

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

Celeron 1020E makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2013 vs 2011). That makes it the safer long-term bet.

Celeron 1020E vs Core i5-2467M Technical Specifications

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

Celeron 1020E

The Celeron 1020E is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 2007-01-01. It is based on the Ivy Bridge (2012−2013) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 2.2 GHz, with boost up to 2.2 GHz. L3 cache: 2 MB (total). L2 cache: 256K (per core). Built on 22 nm process technology. Socket: G2. Thermal design power (TDP): 512 kB + 2 MB. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 1,406 points. Launch price was $69.

Core i5-2467M

The Core i5-2467M is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 1 June 2011 (14 years ago). It is based on the Sandy Bridge (2011−2013) architecture. It features 2 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 1.6 GHz, with boost up to 2.3 GHz. L3 cache: 3 MB (total). L2 cache: 256K (per core). Built on 32 nm process technology. Socket: BGA1023. Thermal design power (TDP): 17 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 1,410 points. Launch price was $250.

⚡

Processing Power

The Celeron 1020E packs 2 cores / 2 threads, matching the Core i5-2467M's 2 cores. Boost clocks reach 2.2 GHz on the Celeron 1020E versus 2.3 GHz on the Core i5-2467M — a 4.4% clock advantage for the Core i5-2467M (base: 2.2 GHz vs 1.6 GHz). The Celeron 1020E uses the Ivy Bridge (2012−2013) architecture (22 nm), while the Core i5-2467M uses Sandy Bridge (2011−2013) (32 nm). In PassMark, the Celeron 1020E scores 1,406 against the Core i5-2467M's 1,410 — a 0.3% lead for the Core i5-2467M. L3 cache: 2 MB (total) on the Celeron 1020E vs 3 MB (total) on the Core i5-2467M.

Feature	Celeron 1020E	Core i5-2467M
Cores / Threads	2 / 2	2 / 4
Boost Clock	2.2 GHz	2.3 GHz+5%
Base Clock	2.2 GHz+38%	1.6 GHz
L3 Cache	2 MB (total)	3 MB (total)+50%
L2 Cache	256K (per core)	256K (per core)
Process	22 nm-31%	32 nm
Architecture	Ivy Bridge (2012−2013)	Sandy Bridge (2011−2013)
PassMark	1,406	1,410

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Celeron 1020E uses the G2 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Core i5-2467M uses BGA1023 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR3-1600 on the Celeron 1020E versus 1333 on the Core i5-2467M — the Celeron 1020E supports 20% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. Both support up to 16 GB of RAM. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. Both provide 16 PCIe lanes. Chipset compatibility: QM77,HM76 (Celeron 1020E) and HM65,HM67,QM67,QS57,QS67,UM67 (Core i5-2467M).

Feature	Celeron 1020E	Core i5-2467M
Socket	G2	BGA1023
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0+50%	PCIe 2.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR3-1600+20%	1333
Max RAM Capacity	16 GB	16 GB
RAM Channels	2	2
ECC Support	Yes	No
PCIe Lanes	16	16

🔧

Advanced Features

Neither processor supports overclocking. Virtualization support: VT-x (Celeron 1020E) vs true (Core i5-2467M). Both include integrated graphics — HD Graphics (Ivy Bridge) (Celeron 1020E) and Intel HD Graphics 3000 (Core i5-2467M) — useful as a fallback for troubleshooting or display output without a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Celeron 1020E targets Budget. Direct competitor: Celeron 1020E rivals Pentium 2020M; Core i5-2467M rivals Core i5-2410M.