Celeron 887 vs Core i5-560M

CPU

GPU

Celeron 887

2 Cores2 Thrd17 WWMax: 1.5 GHz2012

Core i5-560M

2 Cores4 Thrd35 WWMax: 3.2 GHz2010

Performance Spectrum - CPU

Celeron 887

2 / 2

1,877

0.0%

1,894

+0.9%

Celeron Dual-Core T1700

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 887 is positioned at rank 837 and the Core i5-560M is on rank 1121, so the Celeron 887 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 887

#825

Atom x5-Z8300

MSRP: $20|Avg: N/A

1344%

#826

Atom Z3735G

MSRP: $17|Avg: N/A

1324%

#827

Core i5-480M

MSRP: $81|Avg: $77

1216%

#828

Core i5-460M

MSRP: $80|Avg: $129

1210%

#829

Core i5-2540M

MSRP: $266|Avg: $10

1199%

#831

Core i5-450M

MSRP: $32|Avg: $31

1158%

#832

Core i3-380M

MSRP: $49|Avg: $25

1110%

#833

Core i5-430M

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $33

1109%

#834

Core 2 Duo T6600

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $4

1079%

#837

Celeron 887

MSRP: $86|Avg: $15

100%

#852

Pentium P6300

MSRP: $80|Avg: $10

96%

Based on actual market prices and performance synthetic scores.

Performance Per Dollar Core i5-560M

#1109

Atom x5-Z8300

MSRP: $20|Avg: N/A

3485%

#1110

Atom Z3735G

MSRP: $17|Avg: N/A

3433%

#1111

Core i5-480M

MSRP: $81|Avg: $77

3152%

#1112

Core i5-460M

MSRP: $80|Avg: $129

3138%

#1113

Core i5-2540M

MSRP: $266|Avg: $10

3109%

#1115

Core i5-450M

MSRP: $32|Avg: $31

3002%

#1116

Core i3-380M

MSRP: $49|Avg: $25

2879%

#1117

Core i5-430M

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $33

2874%

#1118

Core 2 Duo T6600

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $4

2797%

#1121

Core i5-560M

MSRP: $225|Avg: N/A

100%

#1122

Pentium U5600

MSRP: $100|Avg: $50

99%

#1123

Core m5-6Y57

MSRP: $281|Avg: $281

99%

#1125

Core i7-610E

MSRP: $250|Avg: $40

98%

#1126

Core i5-5350U

MSRP: $315|Avg: N/A

98%

#1127

Core i3-4100E

MSRP: $225|Avg: $30

98%

#1128

Core i7-3520M

MSRP: $346|Avg: N/A

98%

#1129

Pentium Dual Core T4300

MSRP: $150|Avg: $99

98%

#1130

Core i3-2310E

MSRP: $225|Avg: $20

97%

#1131

Core i5-2510E

MSRP: $230|Avg: $30

97%

#1132

Core m5-6Y54

MSRP: $281|Avg: $281

97%

#1133

Core i3-2330E

MSRP: $225|Avg: $10

96%

#1135

Core i5-4288U

MSRP: $342|Avg: N/A

92%

#1136

Core m3-6Y30

MSRP: $281|Avg: $281

92%

Based on actual market prices and performance synthetic scores.

Performance Comparison

About PassMark

🏆 Chipversus Verdict

🚀 Performance Leadership

Performance Leadership: The Core i5-560M delivers superior performance across the board. It outperforms the Celeron 887 in both compute-intensive tasks (0.9% faster) and gaming workloads.

Insight	Celeron 887	Core i5-560M
Gaming	❌ Lower gaming performance	✅ Superior gaming performance
Workstation	❌ Weaker in multi-core tasks	✅ Better multi-core power
Price	✅ More affordable ($15)	⚠️ Higher cost ($225)
Longevity	🛑 Legacy (Sandy Bridge (2011−2013) / 32 nm)	🛑 Legacy (Arrandale (2010−2011) / 32 nm)

💎 Value Proposition

Value Proposition: While both processors are considered legacy components by modern standards, the Celeron 887 holds the technical lead in efficiency. Priced at $15 (vs $225), it costs 93% less. While offering basic entry-level performance, it results in a 1387% higher cost efficiency score compared to the Core i5-560M.

Insight	Celeron 887	Core i5-560M
Cost Efficiency	✅ Better overall value (+1387%)	❌ Lower cost efficiency
Upfront Cost	✅ More affordable ($15)	⚠️ Higher cost ($225)

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 887 Benchmark Check

Core i5-560M Benchmark Check

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of Celeron 887 and Core i5-560M

Celeron 887

The Celeron 887 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 1 September 2012 (13 years ago). It is based on the Sandy Bridge (2011−2013) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 1.5 GHz, with boost up to 1.5 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: 1,877 points. Launch price was $86.

Core i5-560M

The Core i5-560M is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 26 September 2010 (15 years ago). It is based on the Arrandale (2010−2011) architecture. It features 2 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 2.66 GHz, with boost up to 3.2 GHz. L3 cache: 3 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: 1,894 points. Launch price was $225.

⚡

Processing Power

The Celeron 887 packs 2 cores / 2 threads, matching the Core i5-560M's 2 cores. Boost clocks reach 1.5 GHz on the Celeron 887 versus 3.2 GHz on the Core i5-560M — a 72.3% clock advantage for the Core i5-560M (base: 1.5 GHz vs 2.66 GHz). The Celeron 887 uses the Sandy Bridge (2011−2013) architecture (32 nm), while the Core i5-560M uses Arrandale (2010−2011) (32 nm). In PassMark, the Celeron 887 scores 1,877 against the Core i5-560M's 1,894 — a 0.9% lead for the Core i5-560M. Geekbench 6 single-core — the metric most relevant to gaming — records 233 vs 450, a 63.5% lead for the Core i5-560M that directly translates to higher frame rates. Multi-core Geekbench: 415 vs 950 (78.4% advantage for the Core i5-560M). L3 cache: 2 MB (total) on the Celeron 887 vs 3 MB (total) on the Core i5-560M.

Feature	Celeron 887	Core i5-560M
Cores / Threads	2 / 2	2 / 4
Boost Clock	1.5 GHz	3.2 GHz+113%
Base Clock	1.5 GHz	2.66 GHz+77%
L3 Cache	2 MB (total)	3 MB (total)+50%
L2 Cache	256K (per core)	256K (per core)
Process	32 nm	32 nm
Architecture	Sandy Bridge (2011−2013)	Arrandale (2010−2011)
PassMark	1,877	1,894
Geekbench 6 Single	233	450+93%
Geekbench 6 Multi	415	950+129%

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Celeron 887 uses the BGA1023 socket (PCIe 2.0), while the Core i5-560M uses PGA988 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Both support up to DDR3-1333 memory speed. The Celeron 887 supports up to 16 GB of RAM compared to 8 GB — 66.7% more capacity for professional workloads. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. Both provide 16 PCIe lanes. Chipset compatibility: HM65,HM67,QM67,HM70,HM76 (Celeron 887) and HM55,HM57,PM55,QM57 (Core i5-560M).

Feature	Celeron 887	Core i5-560M
Socket	BGA1023	PGA988
PCIe Generation	PCIe 2.0	PCIe 2.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR3-1333	DDR3-1066
Max RAM Capacity	16 GB+100%	8 GB
RAM Channels	2	2
ECC Support	❌	❌
PCIe Lanes	16	16

🔧

Advanced Features

Neither processor supports overclocking. Virtualization support: VT-x (Celeron 887) vs VT-x, VT-d (Core i5-560M). Both include integrated graphics — Intel HD Graphics (Sandy Bridge) (Celeron 887) and Intel HD Graphics (Westmere) (Core i5-560M) — useful as a fallback for troubleshooting or display output without a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Celeron 887 targets Laptop, Core i5-560M targets Laptop. Direct competitor: Celeron 887 rivals Pentium 967; Core i5-560M rivals AMD Turion II Ultra M660.

Feature	Celeron 887	Core i5-560M
Integrated GPU	Yes	Yes
IGPU Model	Intel HD Graphics (Sandy Bridge)	Intel HD Graphics (Westmere)
Unlocked	No	No
AVX-512	No	No
Virtualization	VT-x	VT-x, VT-d
Target Use	Laptop	Laptop