Celeron Dual-Core T1700 vs Celeron 1000M
Celeron Dual-Core T1700
Celeron 1000M
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 T1700 is positioned at rank 769 and the Celeron 1000M is on rank 1026, so the Celeron Dual-Core T1700 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 T1700
Performance Per Dollar Celeron 1000M
Performance Comparison
About PassMark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
| Insight | Celeron Dual-Core T1700 | Celeron 1000M |
|---|---|---|
| Gaming | ✅ Superior gaming performance | ❌ Lower gaming performance |
| Workstation | ❌ Weaker in multi-core tasks | ✅ Better multi-core power |
| Price | ✅ More affordable ($0) | ⚠️ Higher cost ($86) |
| Longevity | 🛑 Legacy (Merom (2006−2008) / 65 nm) | 🛑 Legacy (Ivy Bridge (2012−2013) / 22 nm) |
💎 Value Proposition
| Insight | Celeron Dual-Core T1700 | Celeron 1000M |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ❌ Lower cost efficiency | ❌ Lower cost efficiency |
| Upfront Cost | ✅ More affordable ($0) | ⚠️ Higher cost ($86) |
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 T1700 and Celeron 1000M
Celeron Dual-Core T1700
The Celeron Dual-Core T1700 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: 1.83 GHz. L2 cache: 1 MB. Built on 65 nm process technology. Socket: PGA478. Thermal design power (TDP): 1 MB. Passmark benchmark score: 1,058 points. Launch price was $69.
Celeron 1000M
The Celeron 1000M is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 20 January 2013 (12 years ago). It is based on the Ivy Bridge (2012−2013) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 1.8 GHz, with boost up to 1.8 GHz. L3 cache: 2 MB (total). L2 cache: 256K (per core). Built on 22 nm process technology. Socket: PGA988. Thermal design power (TDP): 35 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 1,070 points. Launch price was $86.
Processing Power
Both the Celeron Dual-Core T1700 and Celeron 1000M share an identical 2-core/2-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 1.83 GHz on the Celeron Dual-Core T1700 versus 1.8 GHz on the Celeron 1000M — a 1.7% clock advantage for the Celeron Dual-Core T1700. The Celeron Dual-Core T1700 uses the Merom (2006−2008) architecture (65 nm), while the Celeron 1000M uses Ivy Bridge (2012−2013) (22 nm). In PassMark, the Celeron Dual-Core T1700 scores 1,058 against the Celeron 1000M's 1,070 — a 1.1% lead for the Celeron 1000M.
| Feature | Celeron Dual-Core T1700 | Celeron 1000M |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 2 / 2 | 2 / 2 |
| Boost Clock | 1.83 GHz+2% | 1.8 GHz |
| Base Clock | — | 1.8 GHz |
| L3 Cache | — | 2 MB (total) |
| L2 Cache | 1 MB+300% | 256K (per core) |
| Process | 65 nm | 22 nm-66% |
| Architecture | Merom (2006−2008) | Ivy Bridge (2012−2013) |
| PassMark | 1,058 | 1,070+1% |
Memory & Platform
The Celeron Dual-Core T1700 uses the PGA478 socket (PCIe 1.1), while the Celeron 1000M uses PGA988 (PCIe 3.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR2-667 on the Celeron Dual-Core T1700 versus DDR3-1600 on the Celeron 1000M — the Celeron 1000M supports 40% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The Celeron 1000M supports up to 32 GB of RAM compared to 4 GB — 155.6% more capacity for professional workloads. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. PCIe lanes: 0 (Celeron Dual-Core T1700) vs 16 (Celeron 1000M) — the Celeron 1000M offers 16 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: GL40,GM45 (Celeron Dual-Core T1700) and Intel FCPGA988 (Celeron 1000M).
| Feature | Celeron Dual-Core T1700 | Celeron 1000M |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | PGA478 | PGA988 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 1.1 | PCIe 3.0+173% |
| Max RAM Speed | DDR2-667 | DDR3-1600+50% |
| Max RAM Capacity | 4 GB | 32 GB+700% |
| RAM Channels | 2 | 2 |
| ECC Support | ❌ | ❌ |
| PCIe Lanes | 0 | 16 |
Advanced Features
Virtualization: No (Celeron Dual-Core T1700) / not specified (Celeron 1000M). The Celeron 1000M includes integrated graphics (Intel HD Graphics (Ivy Bridge)), while the Celeron Dual-Core T1700 requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Celeron Dual-Core T1700 targets Budget. Direct competitor: Celeron Dual-Core T1700 rivals Pentium T2390.
| Feature | Celeron Dual-Core T1700 | Celeron 1000M |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | No | Yes |
| IGPU Model | — | Intel HD Graphics (Ivy Bridge) |
| Unlocked | No | — |
| AVX-512 | No | — |
| Virtualization | No | — |
| Target Use | 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 T1700 and Celeron 1000M
