Celeron 867
VS
Celeron T1600

Celeron 867 vs Celeron T1600

Intel

Celeron 867

2 Cores2 Thrd17 WWMax: 1.3 GHz2012
VS

Performance Spectrum - CPU

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 867 is positioned at rank 1111 and the Celeron T1600 is on rank 1173, so the Celeron 867 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 867

#1099
Atom x5-Z8300
MSRP: $20|Avg: N/A
3342%
#1100
Atom Z3735G
MSRP: $17|Avg: N/A
3293%
#1101
Core i5-480M
MSRP: $81|Avg: $77
3023%
#1102
Core i5-460M
MSRP: $80|Avg: $129
3009%
#1103
Core i5-2540M
MSRP: $266|Avg: $10
2982%
#1105
Core i5-450M
MSRP: $32|Avg: $31
2879%
#1106
Core i3-380M
MSRP: $49|Avg: $25
2761%
#1107
Core i5-430M
MSRP: N/A|Avg: $33
2756%
#1108
Core 2 Duo T6600
MSRP: N/A|Avg: $4
2682%
#1111
Celeron 867
MSRP: $86|Avg: $15
100%
#1112
Pentium B970
MSRP: $125|Avg: $39
100%
#1113
Core i5-2410M
MSRP: $225|Avg: N/A
99%
#1114
Pentium T2370
MSRP: $86|Avg: $10
99%
#1115
Pentium N3710
MSRP: $161|Avg: $50
98%
#1116
Core m3-7Y30
MSRP: $281|Avg: $281
98%
#1117
Pentium 977
MSRP: $134|Avg: $10
98%
#1118
Core i7-2715QE
MSRP: $378|Avg: $50
97%
#1119
VIA Nano U2250
MSRP: $50|Avg: $10
97%
#1121
Core i5-560M
MSRP: $225|Avg: N/A
96%
#1122
Pentium U5600
MSRP: $100|Avg: $50
95%
#1123
Core m5-6Y57
MSRP: $281|Avg: $281
95%
#1125
Core i7-610E
MSRP: $250|Avg: $40
94%
#1126
Core i5-5350U
MSRP: $315|Avg: N/A
94%
Based on actual market prices and performance synthetic scores.

Performance Per Dollar Celeron T1600

#1161
Atom x5-Z8300
MSRP: $20|Avg: N/A
4392%
#1162
Atom Z3735G
MSRP: $17|Avg: N/A
4328%
#1163
Core i5-480M
MSRP: $81|Avg: $77
3973%
#1164
Core i5-460M
MSRP: $80|Avg: $129
3955%
#1165
Core i5-2540M
MSRP: $266|Avg: $10
3919%
#1167
Core i5-450M
MSRP: $32|Avg: $31
3784%
#1168
Core i3-380M
MSRP: $49|Avg: $25
3629%
#1169
Core i5-430M
MSRP: N/A|Avg: $33
3623%
#1170
Core 2 Duo T6600
MSRP: N/A|Avg: $4
3525%
#1173
Celeron T1600
MSRP: $107|Avg: $15
100%
#1174
Pro A12-8800B
MSRP: $400|Avg: $40
100%
#1176
Core i7-2637M
MSRP: $289|Avg: N/A
98%
#1177
Athlon PRO 3045B
MSRP: $426|Avg: $180
97%
#1178
Core 2 Duo SL9600
MSRP: $316|Avg: N/A
97%
#1179
Core 2 Duo T5600
MSRP: $241|Avg: N/A
97%
#1180
Pentium N3510
MSRP: $161|Avg: $161
97%
#1181
Core i7-7Y75
MSRP: $393|Avg: $285
97%
#1183
Core i7-4500U
MSRP: $398|Avg: N/A
94%
#1185
Athlon Neo X2 L325
MSRP: $100|Avg: $5
92%
#1186
Core i3-2370M
MSRP: $225|Avg: N/A
91%
#1187
Core i3-3217UE
MSRP: $225|Avg: $35
91%
#1188
Celeron T3000
MSRP: $150|Avg: $54
90%
Based on actual market prices and performance synthetic scores.

Performance Comparison

About PassMark

🏆 Chipversus Verdict

🚀 Performance Leadership

Performance Leadership: The Celeron 867 delivers superior performance across the board. It outperforms the Celeron T1600 in both compute-intensive tasks (5.4% faster) and gaming workloads.
InsightCeleron 867Celeron T1600
Gaming
Superior gaming performance
Lower gaming performance
Workstation
Better multi-core power
Weaker in multi-core tasks
Price
Equivalent pricing
Equivalent pricing
Longevity
🛑 Legacy (Sandy Bridge (2011−2013) / 32 nm)
🛑 Legacy (Legacy / 65 nm)

💎 Value Proposition

Efficiency: Even within a comparison of older hardware, the Celeron 867 stands out as the superior choice. It delivers superior performance at a comparable price point.
InsightCeleron 867Celeron T1600
Cost Efficiency
Better overall value (+6%)
Lower cost efficiency
Upfront Cost
Equivalent pricing
Equivalent pricing

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.

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of Celeron 867 and Celeron T1600

Intel

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.

Intel

Celeron T1600

The Celeron T1600 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 2007-01-01. Base frequency: 1.66 GHz. L3 cache: 1 MB L2 Cache. Built on 65 nm process technology. Socket: PGA478. Thermal design power (TDP): 35 Watt. Passmark benchmark score: 715 points. Launch price was $69.

Processing Power

The Celeron 867 is built on the Sandy Bridge (2011−2013) architecture. In PassMark, the Celeron 867 scores 755 against the Celeron T1600's 715 — a 5.4% lead for the Celeron 867. L3 cache: 2 MB (total) on the Celeron 867 vs 1 MB L2 Cache on the Celeron T1600.

FeatureCeleron 867Celeron T1600
Cores / Threads
2 / 2
Boost Clock
1.3 GHz
Base Clock
1.3 GHz
1.66 GHz+28%
L3 Cache
2 MB (total)+100%
1 MB L2 Cache
L2 Cache
256K (per core)
Process
32 nm-51%
65 nm
Architecture
Sandy Bridge (2011−2013)
PassMark
755+6%
715
🧠

Memory & Platform

The Celeron 867 uses the BGA1023 socket (PCIe 2.0), while the Celeron T1600 uses PGA478 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.

FeatureCeleron 867Celeron T1600
Socket
BGA1023
PGA478
PCIe Generation
PCIe 2.0
PCIe 2.0
Max RAM Speed
DDR3-1333
Max RAM Capacity
16 GB
RAM Channels
2
ECC Support
PCIe Lanes
16
🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization: VT-x (Celeron 867) / not specified (Celeron T1600). The Celeron 867 includes integrated graphics (HD Graphics (Sandy Bridge)), while the Celeron T1600 requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Celeron 867 targets Budget. Direct competitor: Celeron 867 rivals Pentium 967.

FeatureCeleron 867Celeron T1600
Integrated GPU
Yes
IGPU Model
HD Graphics (Sandy Bridge)
Unlocked
No
AVX-512
No
Virtualization
VT-x
Target Use
Budget
💰

Value Analysis

The Celeron 867 launched at $86 MSRP, while the Celeron T1600 debuted at $107. At current prices ($15 vs $15), the Celeron T1600 is $0 cheaper. In terms of value (PassMark points per dollar), the Celeron 867 delivers 50.3 pts/$ vs 47.7 pts/$ for the Celeron T1600 — making the Celeron 867 the 5.4% better value option.

FeatureCeleron 867Celeron T1600
MSRP
$86-20%
$107
Avg Price (30d)
$15
$15
Performance per Dollar
50.3+5%
47.7
Release Date
2012
2008