
Celeron Dual-Core T1700

Celeron N2820
Celeron Dual-Core T1700 vs Celeron N2820 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 Dual-Core T1700 vs Celeron N2820 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 Dual-Core T1700 vs Celeron N2820: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict
See where each CPU makes more sense in practice: gaming, heavier work, platform cost, power draw, and upgrade path.
Celeron Dual-Core T1700
2008Why buy it
- β Draws 1W instead of 7W, a 6W reduction.
Trade-offs
- βWorse for gaming: lower average FPS than Celeron N2820 across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- βLower PassMark (1,058 vs 1,061).
- βNo integrated graphics, while Celeron N2820 can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.
Celeron N2820
2013Why buy it
- β Better for gaming: +3.7% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- β 100+% more PCIe lanes (4 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
- β Integrated graphics onboard with Intel HD Graphics (Bay Trail), while Celeron Dual-Core T1700 needs a discrete GPU.
Trade-offs
- β600% higher power demand at 7W vs 1W.
Quick Answers
So, is Celeron N2820 better than Celeron Dual-Core T1700?
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 Dual-Core T1700 vs Celeron N2820 Technical Specifications
Side-by-side specs, architecture details, clocks, memory, power, and platform differences.

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 (2006β2008) 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 N2820
The Celeron N2820 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 1 December 2013 (12 years ago). It is based on the Bay Trail-M (2013β2014) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 2.13 GHz, with boost up to 2.39 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 512K (per core). Built on 22 nm process technology. Socket: FCBGA1170. Thermal design power (TDP): 7.5 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 1,061 points. Launch price was $107.
Processing Power
Both the Celeron Dual-Core T1700 and Celeron N2820 share an identical 2-core/2-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 1.83 GHz on the Celeron Dual-Core T1700 versus 2.39 GHz on the Celeron N2820 β a 26.5% clock advantage for the Celeron N2820. The Celeron Dual-Core T1700 uses the Merom (2006β2008) architecture (65 nm), while the Celeron N2820 uses Bay Trail-M (2013β2014) (22 nm). In PassMark, the Celeron Dual-Core T1700 scores 1,058 against the Celeron N2820's 1,061 β a 0.3% lead for the Celeron N2820.
| Feature | Celeron Dual-Core T1700 | Celeron N2820 |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 2 / 2 | 2 / 2 |
| Boost Clock | 1.83 GHz | 2.39 GHz+31% |
| Base Clock | β | 2.13 GHz |
| L3 Cache | β | 0 kB |
| L2 Cache | 1 MB | 512K (per core)+51100% |
| Process | 65 nm | 22 nm-66% |
| Architecture | Merom (2006β2008) | Bay Trail-M (2013β2014) |
| PassMark | 1,058 | 1,061 |
| Geekbench 6 Single | β | 220 |
| Geekbench 6 Multi | β | 400 |
Memory & Platform
The Celeron Dual-Core T1700 uses the PGA478 socket (PCIe 1.1), while the Celeron N2820 uses FCBGA1170 (PCIe 2.0) β making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR2-667 on the Celeron Dual-Core T1700 versus DDR3L-1066 on the Celeron N2820 β the Celeron N2820 supports 59.8% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The Celeron N2820 supports up to 8 GB of RAM compared to 4 GB β 100% more capacity for professional workloads. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. PCIe lanes: 0 (Celeron Dual-Core T1700) vs 4 (Celeron N2820) β the Celeron N2820 offers 4 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: GL40,GM45 (Celeron Dual-Core T1700) and SoC (Celeron N2820).
| Feature | Celeron Dual-Core T1700 | Celeron N2820 |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | PGA478 | FCBGA1170 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 1.1 | PCIe 2.0+82% |
| Max RAM Speed | DDR2-667 | DDR3L-1066+60% |
| Max RAM Capacity | 4 GB | 8 GB+100% |
| RAM Channels | 2 | 2 |
| ECC Support | No | No |
| PCIe Lanes | 0 | 4 |
Advanced Features
Neither processor supports overclocking. Virtualization support: No (Celeron Dual-Core T1700) vs VT-x (Celeron N2820). The Celeron N2820 includes integrated graphics (Intel HD Graphics (Bay Trail)), while the Celeron Dual-Core T1700 requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Celeron Dual-Core T1700 targets Budget, Celeron N2820 targets Netbook. Direct competitor: Celeron Dual-Core T1700 rivals Pentium T2390; Celeron N2820 rivals AMD A6-6310.
| Feature | Celeron Dual-Core T1700 | Celeron N2820 |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | No | Yes |
| IGPU Model | β | Intel HD Graphics (Bay Trail) |
| Unlocked | No | No |
| AVX-512 | No | No |
| Virtualization | No | VT-x |
| Target Use | Budget | Netbook |
Top Performing CPUs
The most powerful cpus ranked by PassMark CPU Mark benchmark scores.













