Celeron Dual-Core T1600 vs Phenom II X6 1035T
Celeron Dual-Core T1600
Phenom II X6 1035T
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 Dual-Core T1600 is positioned at rank 880 and the Phenom II X6 1035T is on rank 192, so the Phenom II X6 1035T offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar Celeron Dual-Core T1600
Performance Per Dollar Phenom II X6 1035T
Performance Comparison
About PassMark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
| Insight | Celeron Dual-Core T1600 | Phenom II X6 1035T |
|---|---|---|
| Gaming | ❌ Lower gaming performance | ✅ Superior gaming performance |
| Workstation | ❌ Weaker in multi-core tasks | ✅ Better multi-core power |
| Price | ⚠️ Higher cost ($150) | ✅ More affordable ($0) |
| Longevity | 🛑 Legacy (Merom (2006−2008) / 65 nm) | 🛑 Legacy (Thuban (2010) / 45 nm) |
💎 Value Proposition
| Insight | Celeron Dual-Core T1600 | Phenom II X6 1035T |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ❌ Lower cost efficiency | ❌ Lower cost efficiency |
| Upfront Cost | ⚠️ Higher cost ($150) | ✅ More affordable ($0) |
Performance Check
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 Dual-Core T1600 and Phenom II X6 1035T
Celeron Dual-Core T1600
The Celeron Dual-Core T1600 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 2007-01-01. It is based on the Merom (2006−2008) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Max frequency: 1.66 GHz. L2 cache: 1 MB. Built on 65 nm process technology. Socket: PGA478. Thermal design power (TDP): 1 MB. Passmark benchmark score: 3,000 points. Launch price was $69.
Phenom II X6 1035T
The Phenom II X6 1035T is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 27 April 2010 (15 years ago). It is based on the Thuban (2010) architecture. It features 6 cores and 6 threads. Base frequency is 2.6 GHz, with boost up to 3.1 GHz. L3 cache: 6 MB (total). L2 cache: 512 kB (per core). Built on 45 nm process technology. Socket: AM3. Thermal design power (TDP): 95 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 3,012 points. Launch price was $189.
Processing Power
The Celeron Dual-Core T1600 packs 2 cores / 2 threads, while the Phenom II X6 1035T offers 6 cores / 6 threads — the Phenom II X6 1035T has 4 more cores. Boost clocks reach 1.66 GHz on the Celeron Dual-Core T1600 versus 3.1 GHz on the Phenom II X6 1035T — a 60.5% clock advantage for the Phenom II X6 1035T. The Celeron Dual-Core T1600 uses the Merom (2006−2008) architecture (65 nm), while the Phenom II X6 1035T uses Thuban (2010) (45 nm). In PassMark, the Celeron Dual-Core T1600 scores 3,000 against the Phenom II X6 1035T's 3,012 — a 0.4% lead for the Phenom II X6 1035T.
| Feature | Celeron Dual-Core T1600 | Phenom II X6 1035T |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 2 / 2 | 6 / 6+200% |
| Boost Clock | 1.66 GHz | 3.1 GHz+87% |
| Base Clock | — | 2.6 GHz |
| L3 Cache | — | 6 MB (total) |
| L2 Cache | 1 MB+100% | 512 kB (per core) |
| Process | 65 nm | 45 nm-31% |
| Architecture | Merom (2006−2008) | Thuban (2010) |
| PassMark | 3,000 | 3,012 |
| Cinebench R23 Multi | — | 2,670 |
Memory & Platform
The Celeron Dual-Core T1600 uses the PGA478 socket (PCIe 1.1), while the Phenom II X6 1035T uses AM3 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches 667 on the Celeron Dual-Core T1600 versus DDR3-1333 on the Phenom II X6 1035T — the Celeron Dual-Core T1600 supports 198.2% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. Chipset compatibility: GL40,GM45,GM47,PM45 (Celeron Dual-Core T1600) and AM3 (Phenom II X6 1035T).
| Feature | Celeron Dual-Core T1600 | Phenom II X6 1035T |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | PGA478 | AM3 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 1.1 | PCIe 2.0+82% |
| Max RAM Speed | 667+22133% | DDR3-1333 |
| Max RAM Capacity | 4 | — |
| RAM Channels | 2 | 2 |
| ECC Support | ❌ | ✅ |
| PCIe Lanes | 0 | — |
Advanced Features
Only the Phenom II X6 1035T has an unlocked multiplier for overclocking — a significant advantage for enthusiasts seeking extra performance. Virtualization support: false (Celeron Dual-Core T1600) vs AMD-V (Phenom II X6 1035T). Primary use case: Celeron Dual-Core T1600 targets Budget, Phenom II X6 1035T targets Budget. Direct competitor: Celeron Dual-Core T1600 rivals Pentium T2390; Phenom II X6 1035T rivals Core i5-750.
| Feature | Celeron Dual-Core T1600 | Phenom II X6 1035T |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | No | No |
| Unlocked | No | Yes |
| AVX-512 | No | No |
| Virtualization | false | AMD-V |
| Target Use | Budget | Budget |
Top Performing CPUs
The most powerful cpus ranked by PassMark CPU Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar CPU comparisons based on Celeron Dual-Core T1600 and Phenom II X6 1035T
