Celeron 2.60 vs Core Solo T1350

Celeron 2.60

1 Cores1 Thrd73 WWMax: 2.6 GHz2003

Core Solo T1350

1 Cores1 Thrd2 WWMax: 1.86 GHz2006

Performance Spectrum - CPU

Celeron 2.60

1 / 1

385

0.0%

405

+5.2%

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.

Value Upgrade Path

This is the official ChipVERSUS Value Rating, comparing raw performance (PassMark) per dollar. Components placed above yours deliver better value for money. The Celeron 2.60 is positioned at rank 1045 and the Core Solo T1350 is on rank 1238, so the Celeron 2.60 offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.

MSRP is the manufacturer's suggested retail price.•
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.

Performance Per Dollar Celeron 2.60

Ryzen 9 7950X

MSRP: $194|Avg: $20

42936%

Core i9-10900T

MSRP: $120|Avg: $5

40570%

Ryzen 3 PRO 4355GE

MSRP: $423|Avg: $5

29457%

Ryzen Threadripper 3960X

MSRP: $1399|Avg: $85

8874%

Ryzen 9 9950X

MSRP: $649|Avg: $129

7029%

Ryzen 5 8400F

MSRP: $303|Avg: $55

6149%

Ryzen 7 PRO 2700

MSRP: $299|Avg: $60

3522%

Ryzen 5 2600X

MSRP: $229|Avg: $55

3476%

Ryzen 3 PRO 5350G

MSRP: $150|Avg: $60

3165%

#10

Core Ultra 5 245KF

MSRP: $294|Avg: $189

3165%

#11

Ryzen 5 5500

MSRP: $159|Avg: $85

3129%

#12

Ryzen 5 3600

MSRP: $199|Avg: $80

3045%

#13

Core i3-9100E

MSRP: $202|Avg: $30

3002%

#14

Core Ultra 5 245K

MSRP: $319|Avg: $200

2990%

#15

Core i3-8300T

MSRP: $138|Avg: $25

2963%

#1045

Celeron 2.60

MSRP: $53|Avg: $10

100%

#1046

Core i7-990X

MSRP: $999|Avg: $225

98%

#1047

Phenom X4 9750B

MSRP: $215|Avg: $34

97%

#1048

Core 2 Duo E8200

MSRP: $163|Avg: $20

97%

#1049

Core 2 Quad Q9450

MSRP: $316|Avg: $15

96%

#1050

Core 2 Duo E8600

MSRP: $200|Avg: $95

95%

#1051

Core 2 Duo E6320

MSRP: $163|Avg: $5

94%

#1052

Core i7-980X

MSRP: $999|Avg: $150

94%

#1053

Athlon 64 X2 3600+

MSRP: $150|Avg: $10

94%

#1054

Core 2 Duo E6420

MSRP: $183|Avg: $10

93%

#1055

Pentium D 940

MSRP: $132|Avg: $15

91%

#1056

Phenom X4 9600B

MSRP: $278|Avg: $20

91%

#1057

Phenom II X3 B77

MSRP: $281|Avg: $35

90%

#1058

Core 2 Duo E6300

MSRP: $163|Avg: $5

89%

#1059

Core 2 Duo E6400

MSRP: $183|Avg: $10

88%

#1060

Core 2 Duo E8300

MSRP: $163|Avg: $20

88%

Based on actual market prices and performance synthetic scores.

Performance Per Dollar Core Solo T1350

#1226

Atom x5-Z8300

MSRP: $20|Avg: N/A

14453%

#1227

Atom Z3735G

MSRP: $17|Avg: N/A

14241%

#1228

Core i5-480M

MSRP: $81|Avg: $77

13074%

#1229

Core i5-460M

MSRP: $80|Avg: $129

13015%

#1230

Core i5-2540M

MSRP: $266|Avg: $10

12896%

#1232

Core i5-450M

MSRP: $32|Avg: $31

12453%

#1233

Core i3-380M

MSRP: $49|Avg: $25

11941%

#1234

Core i5-430M

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $33

11921%

#1235

Core 2 Duo T6600

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $4

11601%

#1238

Core Solo T1350

MSRP: $200|Avg: $70

100%

#1240

Core Solo T1300

MSRP: $209|Avg: $10

91%

#1241

Core Solo T1200

MSRP: $209|Avg: $10

84%

Based on actual market prices and performance synthetic scores.

Performance Comparison

About PassMark

🏆 Chipversus Verdict

🚀 Performance Leadership

Performance Trade-off: The Celeron 2.60 leads in gaming performance. However, the Core Solo T1350 is the stronger candidate for professional workloads, offering 5.1% greater multi-core processing power.

Insight	Celeron 2.60	Core Solo T1350
Gaming	✅ Superior gaming performance	❌ Lower gaming performance
Workstation	❌ Weaker in multi-core tasks	✅ Better multi-core power
Price	✅ More affordable ($10)	⚠️ Higher cost ($70)
Longevity	🛑 Legacy (Northwood (2002−2004) / 130 nm)	🛑 Legacy (Yonah (2005−2006) / 65 nm)

💎 Value Proposition

Efficiency: Even within a comparison of older hardware, the Celeron 2.60 stands out as the superior choice. It is effectively 86% cheaper ($10 vs $70) while identifying as the stronger performer.

Insight	Celeron 2.60	Core Solo T1350
Cost Efficiency	✅ Better overall value (+565%)	❌ Lower cost efficiency
Upfront Cost	✅ More affordable ($10)	⚠️ Higher cost ($70)

Performance Check

Paired with RTX 4090

To accurately isolate CPU performance, all benchmarks below use an NVIDIA RTX 4090 as the reference GPU. This eliminates GPU-side bottlenecks and highlights pure processing throughput differences between the CPUs.

Note: Real-world results may vary based on your actual GPU. CPU performance impact is more visible in processing-intensive titles and high-refresh-rate gaming scenarios.

Celeron 2.60 Benchmark Check

Core Solo T1350 Benchmark Check

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of Celeron 2.60 and Core Solo T1350

Celeron 2.60

The Celeron 2.60 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 2007-01-01. It is based on the Northwood (2002−2004) architecture. It features 1 cores and 1 threads. Max frequency: 2.6 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 128 kB. Built on 130 nm process technology. Socket: PGA478. Thermal design power (TDP): 73 Watt. Memory support: DDR1, DDR2. Passmark benchmark score: 385 points. Launch price was $69.

Core Solo T1350

The Core Solo T1350 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 2008-01-01. It is based on the Yonah (2005−2006) architecture. It features 1 cores and 1 threads. Base frequency is 1.86 GHz, with boost up to 1.86 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 2 MB. Built on 65 nm process technology. Socket: PGA478. Thermal design power (TDP): 31 Watt. Memory support: DDR1. Passmark benchmark score: 405 points. Launch price was $249.

⚡

Processing Power

Both the Celeron 2.60 and Core Solo T1350 share an identical 1-core/1-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 2.6 GHz on the Celeron 2.60 versus 1.86 GHz on the Core Solo T1350 — a 33.2% clock advantage for the Celeron 2.60. The Celeron 2.60 uses the Northwood (2002−2004) architecture (130 nm), while the Core Solo T1350 uses Yonah (2005−2006) (65 nm). In PassMark, the Celeron 2.60 scores 385 against the Core Solo T1350's 405 — a 5.1% lead for the Core Solo T1350. Both processors carry 0 kB of L3 cache.

Feature	Celeron 2.60	Core Solo T1350
Cores / Threads	1 / 1	1 / 1
Boost Clock	2.6 GHz+40%	1.86 GHz
Base Clock	—	1.86 GHz
L3 Cache	0 kB	0 kB
L2 Cache	128 kB	2 MB+1500%
Process	130 nm	65 nm-50%
Architecture	Northwood (2002−2004)	Yonah (2005−2006)
PassMark	385	405+5%

🧠

Memory & Platform

Both processors use the PGA478 socket with PCIe 1.1.

Feature	Celeron 2.60	Core Solo T1350
Socket	PGA478	PGA478
PCIe Generation	PCIe 1.1	PCIe 1.1
Max RAM Speed	DDR2-400	—
Max RAM Capacity	4 GB	—
RAM Channels	1	—
ECC Support	❌	—
PCIe Lanes	0	—

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization: No (Celeron 2.60) / not specified (Core Solo T1350). Primary use case: Celeron 2.60 targets Budget. Direct competitor: Celeron 2.60 rivals Pentium 4 2.40.

Feature	Celeron 2.60	Core Solo T1350
Integrated GPU	No	—
Unlocked	No	—
AVX-512	No	—
Virtualization	No	—
Target Use	Budget	—

💰

Value Analysis

The Celeron 2.60 launched at $53 MSRP, while the Core Solo T1350 debuted at $200. At current prices ($10 vs $70), the Celeron 2.60 is $60 cheaper. In terms of value (PassMark points per dollar), the Celeron 2.60 delivers 38.5 pts/$ vs 5.8 pts/$ for the Core Solo T1350 — making the Celeron 2.60 the 147.7% better value option.