Celeron 2957U vs Core i7-640M

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 2957U vs Core i7-640M 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 2957U vs Core i7-640M: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

Celeron 2957U

2014

Why buy it

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (2,077 vs 2,092).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (2 MB vs 4 MB).
❌1362.9% higher power demand at 512W vs 35W.

Core i7-640M

2010

Why buy it

✅+100% larger total L3 cache (4 MB vs 2 MB).
✅Draws 35W instead of 512W, a 477W reduction.
✅60% more PCIe lanes (16 vs 10) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Trade-offs

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

Quick Answers

So, is Core i7-640M better than Celeron 2957U?

Yes. Core i7-640M is the better all-around CPU here. It gives you a 1.0% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data and 0.7% better PassMark, which is enough to make it the stronger overall pick.

Which one is better for gaming?

If gaming is the priority, Core i7-640M is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 1.0% 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, Core i7-640M is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.7% better PassMark, backed by 2 cores and 4 threads. It also has the larger cache pool with 100% larger total L3 cache (4 MB vs 2 MB).

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

Core i7-640M still makes the most sense overall. Core i7-640M comes in at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it still gives you a 1.0% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data.

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

Celeron 2957U makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2014 vs 2010). That makes it the safer long-term bet.

Celeron 2957U vs Core i7-640M Technical Specifications

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

Celeron 2957U

The Celeron 2957U is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 1 January 2014 (11 years ago). It is based on the Haswell (2013−2015) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 1.4 GHz, with boost up to 1.4 GHz. L3 cache: 2 MB. L2 cache: 512 kB. Built on 22 nm process technology. Socket: FCBGA1168. Thermal design power (TDP): 15 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 2,077 points. Launch price was $107.

Core i7-640M

The Core i7-640M is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 1 September 2010 (15 years ago). It is based on the Arrandale (2010−2011) architecture. It features 2 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 2.8 GHz, with boost up to 3.46 GHz. L3 cache: 4 MB (total). L2 cache: 256K (per core). Built on 32 nm process technology. Socket: PGA988. Thermal design power (TDP): 35 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 2,092 points. Launch price was $346.

⚡

Processing Power

The Celeron 2957U packs 2 cores / 2 threads, matching the Core i7-640M's 2 cores. Boost clocks reach 1.4 GHz on the Celeron 2957U versus 3.46 GHz on the Core i7-640M — a 84.8% clock advantage for the Core i7-640M (base: 1.4 GHz vs 2.8 GHz). The Celeron 2957U uses the Haswell (2013−2015) architecture (22 nm), while the Core i7-640M uses Arrandale (2010−2011) (32 nm). In PassMark, the Celeron 2957U scores 2,077 against the Core i7-640M's 2,092 — a 0.7% lead for the Core i7-640M. L3 cache: 2 MB on the Celeron 2957U vs 4 MB (total) on the Core i7-640M.

Feature	Celeron 2957U	Core i7-640M
Cores / Threads	2 / 2	2 / 4
Boost Clock	1.4 GHz	3.46 GHz+147%
Base Clock	1.4 GHz	2.8 GHz+100%
L3 Cache	2 MB	4 MB (total)+100%
L2 Cache	512 kB+100%	256K (per core)
Process	22 nm-31%	32 nm
Architecture	Haswell (2013−2015)	Arrandale (2010−2011)
PassMark	2,077	2,092
Geekbench 6 Single	284	—

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Celeron 2957U uses the FCBGA1168 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Core i7-640M uses PGA988 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR3L-1600 on the Celeron 2957U versus 1066 on the Core i7-640M — the Celeron 2957U supports 50.1% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The Celeron 2957U supports up to 16 GB of RAM compared to 8 GB — 100% more capacity for professional workloads. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. PCIe lanes: 10 (Celeron 2957U) vs 16 (Core i7-640M) — the Core i7-640M offers 6 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: Wildcat Point-LP (Celeron 2957U) and HM55,HM57,QM57 (Core i7-640M).

Feature	Celeron 2957U	Core i7-640M
Socket	FCBGA1168	PGA988
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0+50%	PCIe 2.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR3L-1600+50%	1066
Max RAM Capacity	16 GB+100%	8 GB
RAM Channels	2	2
ECC Support	No	No
PCIe Lanes	10	16+60%

🔧

Advanced Features

Neither processor supports overclocking. Virtualization support: VT-x (Celeron 2957U) vs true (Core i7-640M). Both include integrated graphics — HD Graphics (Haswell) (Celeron 2957U) and Intel HD Graphics (Ironlake) (Core i7-640M) — useful as a fallback for troubleshooting or display output without a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Celeron 2957U targets Budget. Direct competitor: Celeron 2957U rivals Pentium 2117U; Core i7-640M rivals Core 2 Duo T9600.