Celeron E1600 vs E1-7010

Celeron E1600 vs E1-7010 Performance Spectrum

Celeron E1600

2 / 2

815

0.0%

820

+0.6%

Athlon 64 3000+

Athlon 64 3400+

Mobile Athlon 64 3700+

Athlon 64 FX-57

Ryzen 7 4700G

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 E1600 vs E1-7010 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 E1600 vs E1-7010: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

Celeron E1600

2009

Why buy it

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (815 vs 820).
❌Launch MSRP is still $53 MSRP, while E1-7010 mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
❌6400% higher power demand at 65W vs 1W.

E1-7010

2015

Why buy it

✅+0.6% higher PassMark.
✅Draws 1W instead of 65W, a 64W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Fewer obvious downsides in this matchup outside of normal market pricing swings.

Quick Answers

So, is E1-7010 better than Celeron E1600?

It depends on what you want from the system. For gaming, Celeron E1600 is ahead with a 0.1% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. For rendering, compiling, streaming, and heavier multitasking, E1-7010 pulls ahead with 0.6% better PassMark.

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, E1-7010 is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.6% better PassMark, backed by 2 cores and 2 threads.

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

E1-7010 is still the much better call for a fresh build. E1-7010 comes in at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus $53 MSRP, and it still gives you 0.6% better PassMark. Celeron E1600 only looks stronger on raw value math because it is extremely cheap, but that usually means used-market pricing on an obsolete 2009 platform. Even with 100.0% better value on paper (15.4 vs 0.0 PassMark/$), it really only makes sense as a cheap stopgap or a niche existing-platform option for someone already on LGA775.

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

E1-7010 makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2015 vs 2009) 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 E1600 vs E1-7010 Technical Specifications

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

Celeron E1600

The Celeron E1600 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 2007-01-01. It is based on the Allendale (2006−2009) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 2.4 GHz, with boost up to 2.4 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: 815 points. Launch price was $69.

E1-7010

The E1-7010 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 2014-01-01. It is based on the Carrizo-L (2015) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Max frequency: 1.5 GHz. L2 cache: 1024 kB. Built on 28 nm process technology. Socket: FP4. Thermal design power (TDP): 1 MB. Memory support: DDR3L-1333. Passmark benchmark score: 820 points. Launch price was $50.

⚡

Processing Power

Both the Celeron E1600 and E1-7010 share an identical 2-core/2-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 2.4 GHz on the Celeron E1600 versus 1.5 GHz on the E1-7010 — a 46.2% clock advantage for the Celeron E1600. The Celeron E1600 uses the Allendale (2006−2009) architecture (65 nm), while the E1-7010 uses Carrizo-L (2015) (28 nm). In PassMark, the Celeron E1600 scores 815 against the E1-7010's 820 — a 0.6% lead for the E1-7010.

Feature	Celeron E1600	E1-7010
Cores / Threads	2 / 2	2 / 2
Boost Clock	2.4 GHz+60%	1.5 GHz
Base Clock	2.4 GHz	—
L3 Cache	0 kB	—
L2 Cache	512 kB (total)	1024 kB+100%
Process	65 nm	28 nm-57%
Architecture	Allendale (2006−2009)	Carrizo-L (2015)
PassMark	815	820
Geekbench 6 Single	310	—
Geekbench 6 Multi	560	—

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Celeron E1600 uses the LGA775 socket (PCIe 1.1), while the E1-7010 uses FP4 (PCIe 3.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.

Feature	Celeron E1600	E1-7010
Socket	LGA775	FP4
PCIe Generation	PCIe 1.1	PCIe 3.0+173%
Max RAM Speed	DDR2-800	—
Max RAM Capacity	8 GB	—
RAM Channels	2	—
ECC Support	No	—
PCIe Lanes	0	—

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization: No (Celeron E1600) / not specified (E1-7010). Primary use case: Celeron E1600 targets Budget. Direct competitor: Celeron E1600 rivals Pentium E2220.