
Celeron 867

Celeron E1500
Celeron 867 vs Celeron E1500 Performance Spectrum
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 867 vs Celeron E1500 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.

Path of Exile 2

Counter-Strike 2

League of Legends

Valorant

Among Us

Apex Legends

ARC Raiders

Baldur's Gate 3

Call of Duty: Black Ops 6
Celeron 867 vs Celeron E1500: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict
See where each CPU makes more sense in practice: gaming, heavier work, platform cost, power draw, and upgrade path.
Celeron 867
2012Why buy it
- ✅Draws 17W instead of 65W, a 48W reduction.
- ✅100+% more PCIe lanes (16 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
- ✅Integrated graphics onboard with HD Graphics (Sandy Bridge), while Celeron E1500 needs a discrete GPU.
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower PassMark (755 vs 765).
- ❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 8.8 vs 14.4 PassMark/$ ($86 MSRP vs $53 MSRP).
Celeron E1500
2008Why buy it
- ✅Costs $33 less on MSRP ($53 MSRP vs $86 MSRP).
- ✅Delivers 64.4% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 14.4 vs 8.8 PassMark/$ ($53 MSRP vs $86 MSRP).
Trade-offs
- ❌282.4% higher power demand at 65W vs 17W.
- ❌No integrated graphics, while Celeron 867 can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.
Quick Answers
So, is Celeron E1500 better than Celeron 867?
Which one is better for gaming?
Which one is better for streaming, content creation, and heavy multitasking?
Which one is the smarter buy today, not just the cheaper CPU?
Which one is more future-proof for 2026 and beyond?
Celeron 867 vs Celeron E1500 Technical Specifications
Side-by-side specs, architecture details, clocks, memory, power, and platform differences.

Celeron 867
The Celeron 867 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 1 January 2012 (13 years ago). It is based on the Sandy Bridge (2011−2013) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 1.3 GHz, with boost up to 1.3 GHz. L3 cache: 2 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: 755 points. Launch price was $134.

Celeron E1500
The Celeron E1500 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 30 November 2008 (17 years ago). It is based on the Allendale (2006−2009) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 2.2 GHz, with boost up to 2.2 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 512 kB (total). Built on 65 nm process technology. Socket: LGA775. Thermal design power (TDP): 65 Watt. Memory support: DDR1, DDR2, DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 765 points. Launch price was $63.
Processing Power
Both the Celeron 867 and Celeron E1500 share an identical 2-core/2-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 1.3 GHz on the Celeron 867 versus 2.2 GHz on the Celeron E1500 — a 51.4% clock advantage for the Celeron E1500 (base: 1.3 GHz vs 2.2 GHz). The Celeron 867 uses the Sandy Bridge (2011−2013) architecture (32 nm), while the Celeron E1500 uses Allendale (2006−2009) (65 nm). In PassMark, the Celeron 867 scores 755 against the Celeron E1500's 765 — a 1.3% lead for the Celeron E1500. L3 cache: 2 MB (total) on the Celeron 867 vs 0 kB on the Celeron E1500.
| Feature | Celeron 867 | Celeron E1500 |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 2 / 2 | 2 / 2 |
| Boost Clock | 1.3 GHz | 2.2 GHz+69% |
| Base Clock | 1.3 GHz | 2.2 GHz+69% |
| L3 Cache | 2 MB (total) | 0 kB |
| L2 Cache | 256K (per core) | 512 kB (total)+100% |
| Process | 32 nm-51% | 65 nm |
| Architecture | Sandy Bridge (2011−2013) | Allendale (2006−2009) |
| PassMark | 755 | 765+1% |
| Geekbench 6 Single | — | 285 |
| Geekbench 6 Multi | — | 515 |
Memory & Platform
The Celeron 867 uses the BGA1023 socket (PCIe 2.0), while the Celeron E1500 uses LGA775 (PCIe 1.1) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR3-1333 on the Celeron 867 versus DDR2-800 on the Celeron E1500 — the Celeron 867 supports 66.6% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The Celeron 867 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: 16 (Celeron 867) vs 0 (Celeron E1500) — the Celeron 867 offers 16 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: HM65,HM67 (Celeron 867) and G31,P35,G41 (Celeron E1500).
| Feature | Celeron 867 | Celeron E1500 |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | BGA1023 | LGA775 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 2.0+82% | PCIe 1.1 |
| Max RAM Speed | DDR3-1333+67% | DDR2-800 |
| Max RAM Capacity | 16 GB+100% | 8 GB |
| RAM Channels | 2 | 2 |
| ECC Support | No | No |
| PCIe Lanes | 16 | 0 |
Advanced Features
Neither processor supports overclocking. Virtualization support: VT-x (Celeron 867) vs No (Celeron E1500). The Celeron 867 includes integrated graphics (HD Graphics (Sandy Bridge)), while the Celeron E1500 requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Celeron 867 targets Budget, Celeron E1500 targets Budget. Direct competitor: Celeron 867 rivals Pentium 967; Celeron E1500 rivals Pentium E2200.
| Feature | Celeron 867 | Celeron E1500 |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | Yes | No |
| IGPU Model | HD Graphics (Sandy Bridge) | — |
| Unlocked | No | No |
| AVX-512 | No | No |
| Virtualization | VT-x | No |
| Target Use | Budget | Budget |
Value Analysis
At launch, the Celeron 867 was priced at $86, while the Celeron E1500 came in at $53. On launch pricing ($86 vs $53), Celeron E1500 was $33 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Celeron 867 delivers 8.8 pts/$ vs 14.4 pts/$ for the Celeron E1500 — making the Celeron E1500 the 48.7% better value option.
| Feature | Celeron 867 | Celeron E1500 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $86 | $53-38% |
| Performance per Dollar | 8.8 | 14.4+64% |
| Release Date | 2012 | 2008 |
Affiliate Disclosure
ChipVERSUS is a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to Amazon.com. We may earn a commission on qualifying purchases made through our links. This comes at no additional cost to you and helps support our work in providing comprehensive PC building guides and tools.
Amazon and the Amazon logo are trademarks of Amazon.com, Inc. or its affiliates.
Top Performing CPUs
The most powerful cpus ranked by PassMark CPU Mark benchmark scores.














