Celeron Dual-Core T3300 vs E1-6010

Celeron Dual-Core T3300 vs E1-6010 Performance Spectrum

Celeron Dual-Core T3300

2 / 2

1,005

0.0%

1,006

+0.1%

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3955WX

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7955WX

Ryzen Threadripper 3990X

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 T3300 vs E1-6010 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.

Celeron Dual-Core T3300 vs E1-6010: 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 T3300

2010

Why buy it

✅Draws 1W instead of 10W, a 9W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (1,005 vs 1,006).
❌Launch MSRP is still $86 MSRP, while E1-6010 mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.

E1-6010

2014

Why buy it

✅+0.1% higher PassMark.

Trade-offs

❌900% higher power demand at 10W vs 1W.

Quick Answers

So, is Celeron Dual-Core T3300 better than E1-6010?

It depends on what you want from the system. For gaming, Celeron Dual-Core T3300 is ahead with 48.1% higher max boost clock. For rendering, compiling, streaming, and heavier multitasking, E1-6010 pulls ahead with 0.1% better PassMark.

Which one is better for streaming, content creation, and heavy multitasking?

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, E1-6010 is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.1% better PassMark, backed by 2 cores and 2 threads.

Which one is the smarter buy today, not just the cheaper CPU?

Celeron Dual-Core T3300 is the better buy right now. Celeron Dual-Core T3300 comes in at an unclear MSRP at $86 MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it still gives you 48.1% higher max boost clock. The compromise is that E1-6010 is still stronger for heavier multi-core work with 0.1% better PassMark. It is also 100.0% better value on MSRP (11.7 vs 0.0 PassMark/$), so you are getting the faster CPU without taking a value hit on paper.

Which one is more future-proof for 2026 and beyond?

E1-6010 makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2014 vs 2010) and more multi-core headroom with 2 cores / 2 threads instead of 2/2. That extra compute headroom is more likely to matter as games, background tasks, and creator workloads get heavier.

Celeron Dual-Core T3300 vs E1-6010 Technical Specifications

Side-by-side specs, architecture details, clocks, memory, power, and platform differences.

Celeron Dual-Core T3300

The Celeron Dual-Core T3300 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 2007-01-01. It is based on the Penryn (2008−2011) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Max frequency: 2 GHz. L2 cache: 1 MB. Built on 45 nm process technology. Socket: P. Thermal design power (TDP): 1 MB. Passmark benchmark score: 1,005 points. Launch price was $69.

E1-6010

The E1-6010 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 2014-01-01. It is based on the Beema (2014) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Max frequency: 1.35 GHz. L2 cache: 1024 kB. Built on 28 nm process technology. Socket: FT3. Thermal design power (TDP): 10 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 1,006 points. Launch price was $50.

⚡

Processing Power

Both the Celeron Dual-Core T3300 and E1-6010 share an identical 2-core/2-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 2 GHz on the Celeron Dual-Core T3300 versus 1.35 GHz on the E1-6010 — a 38.8% clock advantage for the Celeron Dual-Core T3300. The Celeron Dual-Core T3300 uses the Penryn (2008−2011) architecture (45 nm), while the E1-6010 uses Beema (2014) (28 nm). In PassMark, the Celeron Dual-Core T3300 scores 1,005 against the E1-6010's 1,006 — a 0.1% lead for the E1-6010.

Feature	Celeron Dual-Core T3300	E1-6010
Cores / Threads	2 / 2	2 / 2
Boost Clock	2 GHz+48%	1.35 GHz
L2 Cache	1 MB	1024 kB
Process	45 nm	28 nm-38%
Architecture	Penryn (2008−2011)	Beema (2014)
PassMark	1,005	1,006
Geekbench 6 Single	300	—
Geekbench 6 Multi	520	—

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Celeron Dual-Core T3300 uses the P socket (PCIe 1.1), while the E1-6010 uses FT3 (PCIe 3.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.

Feature	Celeron Dual-Core T3300	E1-6010
Socket	P	FT3
PCIe Generation	PCIe 1.1	PCIe 3.0+173%
Max RAM Speed	DDR3-800	—
Max RAM Capacity	8 GB	—
RAM Channels	2	—
ECC Support	No	—
PCIe Lanes	0	—

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization: No (Celeron Dual-Core T3300) / not specified (E1-6010). Primary use case: Celeron Dual-Core T3300 targets Budget. Direct competitor: Celeron Dual-Core T3300 rivals Pentium T4200.