Celeron E1200 vs Celeron U3600

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 E1200 vs Celeron U3600 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 E1200 vs Celeron U3600: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

See where each CPU makes more sense in practice: gaming, heavier work, platform cost, power draw, and upgrade path.

Celeron E1200

2008

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +7.9% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Costs $81 less on MSRP ($53 MSRP vs $134 MSRP).
✅Delivers 169.0% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 12.5 vs 4.7 PassMark/$ ($53 MSRP vs $134 MSRP).

Trade-offs

❌261.1% higher power demand at 65W vs 18W.

Celeron U3600

2011

Why buy it

✅Draws 18W instead of 65W, a 47W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Celeron E1200 across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (625 vs 665).
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 4.7 vs 12.5 PassMark/$ ($134 MSRP vs $53 MSRP).

Quick Answers

So, is Celeron E1200 better than Celeron U3600?

Yes. Celeron E1200 is the better all-around CPU here. It gives you a 7.9% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data and 6.4% better PassMark, which is enough to make it the stronger overall pick.

Which one is better for gaming?

If gaming is the priority, Celeron E1200 is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 7.9% more average FPS across 50 shared CPU game tests.

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Celeron E1200 is the stronger fit. You are getting 6.4% better PassMark, backed by 2 cores and 2 threads.

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

Celeron E1200 is the better buy right now. Celeron E1200 comes in $81 cheaper on MSRP at $53 MSRP versus $134 MSRP, and it still gives you a 7.9% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. It is also 169.0% better value on MSRP (12.5 vs 4.7 PassMark/$), so you are getting the faster CPU without taking a value hit on paper.

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

Celeron U3600 makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2011 vs 2008). That makes it the safer long-term bet.

Celeron E1200 vs Celeron U3600 Technical Specifications

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

Celeron E1200

The Celeron E1200 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 20 January 2008 (17 years ago). It is based on the Allendale (2006−2009) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 1.6 GHz, with boost up to 1.6 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 512 kB (total). Built on 65 nm process technology. Socket: LGA775. Thermal design power (TDP): 65 Watt. Memory support: DDR1, DDR2, DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 665 points. Launch price was $40.

Celeron U3600

The Celeron U3600 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 2007-01-01. It is based on the Westmere (2010−2011) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 1.2 GHz, with boost up to 0.1 GHz. L3 cache: 2 MB. L2 cache: 512 kB. Built on 32 nm process technology. Socket: BGA1288. Thermal design power (TDP): 18 Watt. Memory support: DDR3-800. Passmark benchmark score: 625 points. Launch price was $69.

⚡

Processing Power

Both the Celeron E1200 and Celeron U3600 share an identical 2-core/2-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 1.6 GHz on the Celeron E1200 versus 0.1 GHz on the Celeron U3600 — a 176.5% clock advantage for the Celeron E1200 (base: 1.6 GHz vs 1.2 GHz). The Celeron E1200 uses the Allendale (2006−2009) architecture (65 nm), while the Celeron U3600 uses Westmere (2010−2011) (32 nm). In PassMark, the Celeron E1200 scores 665 against the Celeron U3600's 625 — a 6.2% lead for the Celeron E1200. L3 cache: 0 kB on the Celeron E1200 vs 2 MB on the Celeron U3600.

Feature	Celeron E1200	Celeron U3600
Cores / Threads	2 / 2	2 / 2
Boost Clock	1.6 GHz+1500%	0.1 GHz
Base Clock	1.6 GHz+33%	1.2 GHz
L3 Cache	0 kB	2 MB
L2 Cache	512 kB (total)	512 kB
Process	65 nm	32 nm-51%
Architecture	Allendale (2006−2009)	Westmere (2010−2011)
PassMark	665+6%	625
Geekbench 6 Single	210	—
Geekbench 6 Multi	380	—

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Celeron E1200 uses the LGA775 socket (PCIe 1.1), while the Celeron U3600 uses BGA1288 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.

Feature	Celeron E1200	Celeron U3600
Socket	LGA775	BGA1288
PCIe Generation	PCIe 1.1	PCIe 2.0+82%
Max RAM Speed	DDR2-800	—
Max RAM Capacity	8 GB	—
RAM Channels	2	—
ECC Support	No	—
PCIe Lanes	0	—

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization: No (Celeron E1200) / not specified (Celeron U3600). Primary use case: Celeron E1200 targets Budget. Direct competitor: Celeron E1200 rivals Pentium E2140.

Feature	Celeron E1200	Celeron U3600
Integrated GPU	No	—
Unlocked	No	—
AVX-512	No	—
Virtualization	No	—
Target Use	Budget	—

💰

Value Analysis

At launch, the Celeron E1200 was priced at $53, while the Celeron U3600 came in at $134. On launch pricing ($53 vs $134), Celeron E1200 was $81 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Celeron E1200 delivers 12.5 pts/$ vs 4.7 pts/$ for the Celeron U3600 — making the Celeron E1200 the 91.6% better value option.

Feature	Celeron E1200	Celeron U3600
MSRP	$53-60%	$134
Performance per Dollar	12.5+166%	4.7
Release Date	2008	2011

Search Celeron E1200 on Amazon

Search Celeron U3600 on Amazon

Affiliate Disclosure

ChipVERSUS is a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to Amazon.com. We may earn a commission on qualifying purchases made through our links. This comes at no additional cost to you and helps support our work in providing comprehensive PC building guides and tools.

Amazon and the Amazon logo are trademarks of Amazon.com, Inc. or its affiliates.